Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2008, Publication: 97th ILC session (2008)

A Government representative said that the commitment of his Government to eradicate the bonded labour system was evident from its ratification of the Convention in 1954 and the enactment of the Bonded Labour Abolition System Ordinance in 1975 and the adoption of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act in 1976 (BLSA). Institutional mechanisms had been established for the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labour and for the punishment of offenders. There had also been much action in practice, with the identification of 287,555 bonded labourers and the rehabilitation of 267,593 of them, as well as measures to provide employment opportunities which prevented people from falling into bondage. In recognition that bondage tended to occur primarily due to economic deprivation, various schemes had been introduced, such as the National Rural Guarantee Scheme, which guaranteed 100 days' employment a year. As a result of these schemes wages had risen and there was less migration.

He expressed reservations about certain estimates of the numbers of bonded labour made by some agencies and recalled that the definition of bonded labourers needed to meet the characteristics set out in the ILO Global Report on the subject, which indicated that forced labour could not be equated simply with low wages or poor working conditions. Nor did it cover situations of pure economic necessity such as where a worker felt unable to leave a job because of the real or perceived absence of employment alternatives. The ILO definition of forced labour comprised two basic elements: the work or service was exacted under the menace of a penalty and was undertaken involuntarily. He noted that the Committee of Experts had questioned the adequacy of the penalties imposed and explained that exoneration was only granted when there was a lack of appropriate proof of forced labour as determined by the independent judicial authorities. There had been numerous cases in which a person had been identified as a bonded labourer and rehabilitated, but in which the employer had been acquitted because bondage had not been clearly established. However, unnecessary focus on these cases would tend to divert attention from real cases of bonded labour.

With regard to the recommendation of the Committee of Experts that a large-scale national survey on bonded labour be undertaken as a matter of priority, he recalled that the identification of bonded labour was a sensitive issue and that the approach adopted needed to be humane and unconventional. Information had to be collected by interviewing the affected persons indirectly about the nature of the exploitation and their conditions of service. Only then could it be determined whether they fell into the category of bonded labour. There was a practice under which contractors paid workers in advance for a specific task and this had incorrectly been branded as bonded labour. He added that it was the responsibility of the States to address these problems. In order to assist them, the central Government provided grants to States to conduct district surveys of bonded labour and to carry out awareness-raising activities. As a large number of surveys had been conducted by state governments, it was not considered necessary to conduct a national survey throughout the country.

In relation to the comments of the Committee of Experts concerning Vigilance Committees, he noted that all state governments had constituted Vigilance Committees at district and subdivision levels and that these committees were meeting regularly. In reply to the request by the Committee of Experts for information on the number of bonded labour complaints lodged with village institutions, he recalled that the Government's main priority was the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labour. Nevertheless, 5,893 cases of prosecution and 1,289 convictions had been reported by the states so far under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act. These figures needed to be understood in the context of the socio-cultural environment in which the whole system operated. The informal grievance redressal mechanism in villages also acted as a dispute resolution mechanism, although records were not kept of such conciliation cases. He added that the incidence of bonded labour was declining and that awareness-raising workshops were being organized in the states by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in collaboration with the Ministry of Labour and Employment.

With reference to the request by the Committee of Experts for further information on the release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers and the upgrading of the skills of freed bonded labourers, he indicated that the NHRC had been involved in overseeing and reviewing the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, and the centrally sponsored scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers. The NHRC had appointed special rapporteurs to visit districts and ascertain the situation at the local level. The follow-up action taken on their reports and the awareness-raising workshops held showed the deep commitment to eliminating the menace of the bonded labour system. Moreover, a special group had been established to monitor the implementation of these measures and he provided details of its meetings in all regions and States between 2004-08. Detailed guidelines had been issued to state governments and they had been advised to integrate the centrally sponsored scheme with other ongoing poverty alleviation schemes with a view to pooling resources for the meaningful rehabilitation of bonded labourers.

With regard to the application and enforcement of the prohibitions established under the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, he provided information on the prohibition on child labour imposed in October 2006 on employment and domestic service in hotels, motels, restaurants, roadside eateries and recreational centres. The state governments had been given advice on the appropriate measures to take and the Ministry had undertaken an intensive awareness-raising campaign through the national and regional media. The action plans prepared by state governments had been discussed in regional conferences and meetings. The States had been urged to give due publicity to the prohibition and instructions had been issued requiring government employees to refrain from the employment of children as domestic servants. A special commemorative stamp on child labour had been issued in December 2006 and a nationwide enforcement drive against child labour had been launched in November 2007. Statistics on the implementation of the prohibition had been supplied to the Office.

In reply to the request of the Committee of Experts for information on the sanctions or sentences imposed, he indicated that the necessary information had been submitted to the Office and showed the declining trend of instances of child labour in each State. In response to the request by the Committee of Experts for updated and detailed information on the implementation of the National Child Labour Projects (NCLPs) scheme, he noted that the information provided to the Office illustrated the successful implementation of the scheme in all 20 States in terms of the rehabilitation of child labourers withdrawn from various industries. A recent evaluation of the scheme had been conducted through independent agencies and the final report was under preparation.

The speaker added that certain amendments were proposed in the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act 2006, with a view to broadening the scope of the original 1956 Act and focussing on traffickers, preventing the revictimization of victims and improving its implementation. The major amendments included increasing the age of children (minors) from 16 to 18 years and the deletion of provisions calling for the punishment and removal of prostitutes, in recognition that women and children involved in prostitution were often victims of trafficking and that their penalization would traumatize them even further. Other amendments included the introduction of new sections defining the offence of "trafficking in persons" in accordance with the relevant United Nations instruments and the punishment of persons involved in trafficking, as well as those who visited or established a brothel for the purposes of sexual exploitation. It was further proposed to establish a central authority to combat trafficking in persons at the central and state levels. He further noted that a comprehensive scheme for the prevention of trafficking and the rescue, rehabilitation and reintegration of the victims of trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation had been launched in December 2007. The scheme consisted of prevention, rescue, rehabilitation, reintegration and repatriation measures. In addition, the Ministry of Women and Child Development had established a Central Advisory Committee composed of representatives of a broad cross-section of ministries and state governments, as well as NGOs, police organizations and international organizations. Some of the senior police officers in states where the problem was recognized as being acute were also being associated with the Advisory Committee. In its recent meetings, the Committee had identified the priority areas for action and had drawn up guidelines for use by all stakeholders.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for his submission. The case had been considered by the Conference Committee on nine occasions since 1989 and even more frequently by the Committee of Experts. While noting the concerns expressed by the Government regarding the validity of the statistics provided by NGOs and mentioned in the Committee of Experts' report, the statistics supplied by the Government in its 2006 report demonstrated that cases of bonded or forced labour continued to exist. Despite the possible difficulties in compiling the relevant data, it remained crucial to have accurate information on the magnitude of the practice of bonded labour. The Government should therefore collect and compile accurate data on the existence of forced labour in India.

There had been a number of positive developments, including the existence of vigilance committees (VCs). In view of the shortcomings observed in this context by the Committee of Experts, the Employer members requested the Government to address the issue of the functioning of the VCs in its next report, in keeping with their mandate under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.

As to the enforcement of sanctions, the Employer members, mindful of Article 25 of the Convention and recalling the need for the judiciary to ensure enforcement of legislation prohibiting forced labour, encouraged the Government to provide detailed information regarding the prosecution of forced labour cases.

With respect to child labour, statistics showed that, regrettably, the situation did not appear to have improved. The detection of violations and initiation of prosecutions had declined in 2004-05, whereas statistics indicated an increase in incidents of child labour. The Government should provide information, in its next report, on the nature of sanctions or penalties imposed in case of convictions pursuant to current legislation concerning work of children in hazardous occupations. The Employer members also encouraged the Government to address the recent decline in the detection of violations and initiation of prosecutions.

In view of the positive developments relating to the National Child Labour Project of the Ministry of Labour and Employment, the Government should continue providing detailed information on that initiative. The Employer members further noted a number of positive legislative efforts of the Government, including the amendment of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 in 2006, the enactment of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act 2005 (CPCRA), the draft Offences against Children Bill, 2006 (DOCB) and the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Amendment Bill 2006. The Government should provide information regarding the application of the provisions of the CPCRA, as they related to the trafficking of children for the purpose of commercial exploitation or prostitution. Furthermore, the Government should also supply, in its next report, additional information as to the enactment of the DOCB and the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Amendment Bill, as well as detailed information concerning other measures addressing trafficking and sexual exploitation of children.

The Worker members pointed out that this was the ninth time that the Conference Committee was examining the case of bonded and forced labour in India. Little progress had been made. The statistics provided by the Govern- ment were lower than those reported by other institutions and NGOs which estimated the number of persons living under conditions of slavery to range from 20 to 65 million. The Ghandi Peace Foundation and the National Labour Institute had mentioned some 2.6 million people working in bonded labour in agriculture alone while bonded and forced labour was prevalent in other sectors, including the brick kiln and stone quarry industry, silk and cotton production, domestic work and carpet and firecracker industries.

The Worker members considered that the Government was underestimating the problem, which could not be addressed without accurate knowledge of its extent and complexities. They therefore supported the Committee of Experts' request for a national survey on bonded labour to be carried out as a matter of priority. The federal Government's delegating the responsibility for data collection to the States was not appropriate, as States were not equipped for and did not give priority to such an activity. This was evidenced by the ILO evaluation of the Prevention and Elimination of Bonded Labour in South Asia project which had provided assistance to state governments to conduct surveys of bonded labour in 120 districts. Many States had not used the scheme. Owing to the lack of resources allocated to do surveys and lack of initiative by the States, bonded labour was considered not to exist.

Furthermore, new forms of bonded labour linked to the globalized economy were emerging, which had to be addressed at the central level as they occurred across States. In addition to the traditional debt bondage which was the result of feudal-like labour relationships, hundreds of thousands of workers, in particular girls, were being added to the number of workers under bonded labour. According to the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, children were being trafficked from Rajastan to Gujarat to work 12-hour days on hybrid cotton seed farms under hazardous conditions and exposed to pesticides. This type of work was linked to modern globalized production chains to provide garments sold in the international garment market. Child workers as young as 10 years old were reported by The Observer on 28 October 2007 to have been found working under near slavery conditions to produce clothes for a well-known clothing company. The ILO Subregional Office for South Asia had found that globalization had contributed to the rise in forced labour, and trafficking in particular, and estimated that private contractors and traffickers earned about US$9.7 billion.

The Worker members welcomed the Government's decision to conduct a nationwide survey to estimate child labour and emphasized that such a survey should cover all aspects of labour exploitation relevant to the Convention, including bonded labour. They also recommended that data on bonded labour and child bonded labour be included in the 2011 national census. Trade unions and NGOs should be involved in collecting data and identifying sectors and areas where bonded labour was prevalent.

India had been the first country to enact legislation against bonded labour with the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act of 1976, which imposed penalties for offenders. Its strict implementation would be instrumental in addressing the problem and in preventing children from being forced to work in exchange for monetary advancements to their parents. The report of the Committee of Experts indicated, however, that the vigilance committees were not effective as instruments to implement the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act. The Worker members therefore supported the strengthening of the vigilance committees and suggested that other institutions might be needed in their place. Local panchayats had been effective in Andra Pradesh in releasing children from bonded labour and rehabilitating them in the educational system.

The Worker members wished to draw attention to the experience of Brazil where the Government was using multidisciplinary teams, including police, public prosecutors, social workers, trade unions and NGOs, to identify and liberate victims of bonded labour. They suggested an exchange of good practice, including effective sanctions, between the Governments of India and Brazil, facilitated by the ILO. Publishing a list of employers using bonded labour had proved effective in Brazil, while the fines imposed in India appeared too low to be truly dissuasive.

The Worker members supported the Committee of Experts' request to the Government to address the serious deficiencies in enforcing sanctions under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act and recommended that data on sanctions imposed be published for each State. More training and awareness-raising of law enforcement officials and members of the judiciary were needed in cooperation with the National Human Rights Commission. Widespread publicity campaigns, with the involvement of trade unions, NGOs and employer organizations, exposing bonded and forced labour as a serious crime could help change social acceptance of the phenomenon and increase reporting of cases of bonded labour. Unions were also instrumental in linking released bonded labourers to social welfare schemes.

The Worker members welcomed the efforts made by the Government to reduce the number of children working in forced labour and the decision to extend the scope of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, in order to include more occupations. They emphasized, however, that the Act needed more effective implementation, and that better facilities for rehabilitation were also required. The IPEC project which was initiated in 1992 and which was being implemented in 20 districts of four States and in the Central Capital Territory, as well as the Government's five-year plan (2008-13) to expand the national child labour projects to all districts in the country were welcomed. The Worker members reiterated their concern, however, about the slow progress made and the new forms of child labour that were not being sufficiently addressed.

India was a source, destination and transit country for trafficking of persons for purposes of forced labour and, in particular, for the sexual exploitation of women and girls. The Ministry of Home Affairs estimated that 90 per cent of such sex trafficking was internal and estimates of the number of victims varied greatly. An estimated 15 per cent of prostitutes were children and tens of thousands of women and girls were trafficked from neighbouring countries.

In conclusion, the Worker members once again emphasized the extent and seriousness of the violation of Convention No. 29. Instead of going away as a result of economic growth, the problem of forced labour was getting worse as old and new forms of bonded labour were becoming integrated in the global production chains and international trade. The Government was urged to strengthen and accelerate the implementation of the legislation in place and put new innovative mechanisms into action to eliminate bonded and forced labour with the utmost priority.

The Worker member of India recalled that forced labour was a consequence of feudalism. India had been under imperialist rule which encouraged and maintained bonded labour for economic and political interests. Convention No. 29 was adopted in 1930 but the British authorities had not applied the Convention in India. It was only after independence that the national Government ratified the Convention in 1954. Furthermore, the law prohibiting forced labour was only enacted in 1976.

In this era of globalization, the rich were getting richer and the poor were getting poorer. Some 400 million workers were not covered by social security schemes. Many of these workers lived below the poverty line. Their jobs were never secured. Poverty had reached such an extent that the workers sometimes exposed themselves to debt traps. In some of the poorer States of the country, poverty also resulted in trafficking of women and children and, with the complicity of major companies in both sending and receiving countries, trafficking had become a growing business all over the world.

The trade union movement was aware of the problem and was opposed to such practices. The unions acknowledged the efforts of the Government to eradicate bonded labour and urged the Government to take all possible steps to severely punish the offenders and to rehabilitate the victims. The Government should set up a tripartite meeting on the issues of bonded labour and trafficking of women and children at the central level to discuss in depth the magnitude of the problem and the steps to be taken in the present circumstances.

The Employer member of India indicated that bonded labour was a sensitive issue, hence, no credible survey could be done on the basis of assumptions. As bonded labour was often hidden and found in the informal sector, it was difficult to detect it by a mere headcount. No survey was therefore possible. Some of the statistics provided by NGOs were questionable. However, India had a highly developed census system which was transparent and reliable. As per the definition of forced labour, work performed in brick kilns and agriculture was in fact not forced labour within the meaning of the Convention. This matter would need further examination. The employers in India had adopted a code of practice to address child labour and all employers had been asked to apply it. Many employers were also involved in rehabilitation measures, including in the informal sector, and participated in tripartite mechanisms to address child and forced labour.

The Government representative of India reiterated that the size of the country and its plurality in terms of social and cultural conditions had to be taken into account when assessing efforts regarding the application of the Convention. Whereas the Indian census was a permanent operation producing regular and comprehensive statistical data, it might be possible to complement it, as and when appropriate, with sample surveys on specific issues, such as bonded labour. Sample surveys were a highly scientific task which required appropriate manpower.

Despite the census data showing an increase of child labour between 1991 and 2001, child labour had actually declined, if the population growth that occurred during the period was taken into account. As regards the capacity of the States to establish statistical data, he reassured the Committee that appropriate structures were in place in the States, at the district level. Likewise, local institutions were increasingly efficient in addressing bonded labour. Additional statistical information on prosecutions would be provided to the ILO. The traditional system of moneylending had almost entirely disappeared due to the development of modern financial services. The elimination of child labour required holistic approaches, including awareness-raising. The support of the ILO in this respect was appreciated. His Government also considered employment creation, skills upgrading and universal health care as crucial in addressing the root causes of child labour. Vigilance concerning new forms of forced labour was required from all countries, not only India.

The Worker members noted that it was impossible to exactly determine the extent of bonded labour, due to the fact that such determination would be based on partial data extracted from local studies or information given by state governments. The Conference Committee should therefore support the view expressed by the Committee of Experts on the need for a large-scale national survey on bonded labour based on valid and appropriate statistical methods. Such a study would be the basis for a national strategy towards a better implementation of the legislation at all levels.

While recognizing the conformity of Indian legislation with provisions of Convention No. 29, the Worker members hoped for a strategy towards the effective enforcement of this legislation so that the law did not become a dead letter. They further stressed that this strategy, which should include information and awareness-raising campaigns, needed a real commitment on the part of local authorities, workers' organizations and NGOs, under an effective central coordination. Furthermore, the country's geographical size should not be considered as a justification for excluding a proactive approach covering the whole country.

The Worker members, referring to the experience of the Government of Brazil, supported the idea of encouraging the good practice exchange among countries having the same problems regarding the application of international conventions on forced labour. Moreover, they stressed the importance of ensuring the good functioning of the justice system with regard to cases of forced labour, as well as the application of sufficiently effective and dissuasive penalties in order to deter forced labour.

They encouraged the Government to request ILO technical assistance when elaborating and implementing such an integrated strategy. Moreover, the Government should commit to submit a detailed report on the progress achieved and the strategy's impact, including information and awareness-raising campaigns on the fight against forced labour at all levels and in all regions of the country.

The Employer members thanked the Government for the information provided and acknowledged that the problems of forced labour were connected to the existence of poverty. They welcomed the measures taken by the Government in the areas of skills development and health care. Nevertheless, India being the world's largest democracy and given the Government's commitment to transparency on the extent of the problem, they urged the Government to collect and compile appropriate national statistics. Noting the Government's indication of the possibility to complement the existing census data with more specific surveys, the Employer members urged the Government to follow up on this matter. In conclusion, they reminded the Government of the importance of Convention No. 29 and urged it to intensify its efforts to eliminate the use of forced labour and to report on the results achieved in this regard.

The Government representative of India stated that although his Government took note of the conclusions arrived at by the Committee and would act on the most positive suggestions contained therein, one of the aspects of the conclusions was a matter of concern for his Government, namely the request to carry out a comprehensive national survey on bonded labour. As already mentioned in his opening remarks, the conduct of such a survey was not possible in a vast and diverse country such as India. The incidence of bonded labour was not spread throughout the whole country and was confined to a few isolated pockets. Due to resource constraints, surveys on this issue were limited to the specific States concerned and the Government took all necessary measures to facilitate the conduct of such surveys notably through the provision of funds. The Government would ensure that new stateoriented surveys would be conducted and that NGOs, employers and employees would be fully consulted in the process. On the contrary, the Government did not feel that it was necessary to carry out a national survey throughout the whole country. The speaker requested the Committee to appreciate this point.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the detailed information supplied by the Government representative and of the discussion which followed. The Committee welcomed the positive measures taken by the Government and the Government's commitment to address the problem of bonded labour in the country. It noted, in particular, the information on the application in practice of the release and rehabilitation policies and programmes, including the Centrally Sponsored Scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labour, the Government's efforts to improve the effectiveness of the vigilance committees, as well as statistical information concerning the release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers obtained from the government-funded district level surveys. The Committee also noted the information on cases of prosecutions under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, as well as the Government's statement that the incidence of bonded labour was declining.

However, while noting the positive steps taken by the Government to combat bonded labour, the Committee once again expressed concern about the disparity of statistics over the years and the Government's unwillingness to conduct a National Survey on bonded labour throughout the country. It urged the Government once again to undertake a comprehensive national survey using an appropriate statistical methodology and other data collection methods, in order to better identify the magnitude of the problem. Such a survey should involve employers' and workers' organizations as well as NGOs in the collection of data and the identification of sectors and areas where bonded labour was prevalent.

The Committee noted with regret that more than 30 years after the adoption of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, in spite of the efforts made, bonded labour had not yet been eradicated in practice and new forms of bonded labour were emerging. The progress made towards full compliance with the Convention were insufficient, despite repeated comments by the Committee of Experts and numerous discussions of the case in this Committee.

The Committee shared the Committee of Experts concern about the serious and ongoing deficiencies in law enforce- ment including shortcomings of the vigilance committees, low prosecution rate and insufficiently dissuasive penalties.

The Committee noted the Government's efforts to eliminate child labour falling under the Convention, i.e. labour performed in the conditions which were sufficiently hazardous or arduous so that the work concerned could not be considered voluntary. The Committee welcomed the planned extension to cover all districts in India of the National Child Labour Project for the rehabilitation of children working in hazardous industries. It took note of the measures under the National Plan of Action to combat trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children. The Committee also welcomed the measures taken by the Government in order to reinforce legislation, such as the elaboration of the draft Offences against Children Bill and the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Amendment Bill, which sought to improve deficiencies of the Penal Code by specifically including the offence of sexual exploitation and trafficking of children as well as providing for corresponding sanctions. The Committee also noted the information about a new Central Scheme - "Comprehensive Scheme for Prevention of Trafficking and Rescue, Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Victims of Trafficking and Commercial Sexual Exploitation" - launched in December 2007, as well as the establishment of the Central Advisory Committee in the Ministry of Women and Child Development.

While acknowledging the recent initiatives of the Government, the Committee urged the Government to pursue its efforts with added vigour in order to eradicate bonded labour throughout the country and to combat child labour under the Convention. The Committee drew the Government's attention to the urgent need to reinforce the effectiveness of the vigilance committees or other appropriate mechanisms. It should also take action to increase the impact of awareness-raising measures as regards both traditional forms and the new forms of forced and bonded labour, including those connected with trafficking in persons. The Committee pointed out that developing and reinforcing the legislative provisions and strengthening the law enforcement mechanism were vital, along with measures of a socio-economic character, for the effective eradication of forced or bonded labour and child labour. The Committee requested the Government to submit a report for the 2009 session of the Committee of Experts which should contain comprehensive information on the actions taken at the national, state and local levels, including legislative developments, reliable statistics on forced or bonded labour, information on prosecutions and penalties imposed, and on the progress achieved on the eradication of forced or bonded labour. The Committee expressed the firm hope that the full application of this fundamental Convention would be ensured, both in law and in practice. It proposed that the Government might wish to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.

The Government representative of India stated that although his Government took note of the conclusions arrived at by the Committee and would act on the most positive suggestions contained therein, one of the aspects of the conclusions was a matter of concern for his Government, namely the request to carry out a comprehensive national survey on bonded labour. As already mentioned in his opening remarks, the conduct of such a survey was not possible in a vast and diverse country such as India. The incidence of bonded labour was not spread throughout the whole country and was confined to a few isolated pockets. Due to resource constraints, surveys on this issue were limited to the specific States concerned and the Government took all necessary measures to facilitate the conduct of such surveys notably through the provision of funds. The Government would ensure that new stateoriented surveys would be conducted and that NGOs, employers and employees would be fully consulted in the process. On the contrary, the Government did not feel that it was necessary to carry out a national survey throughout the whole country. The speaker requested the Committee to appreciate this point.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2003, Publication: 91st ILC session (2003)

A Government representative began by presenting the members of the high-level delegation accompanying him from the Ministry of Labour, which served to show how seriously his Government took its relations with the ILO. He therefore hoped that all the members of the Committee would appreciate the effort and courtesy of the Government in going to such great lengths to explain the situation prevailing in the country and the measures adopted by his country to address the issues under discussion. In particular, he hoped that the Committee would discuss the case in a constructive and appreciative manner on the basis that all of its members were equal and that all speakers would refrain from using any of the unparliamentary and indecorous language which had been heard in the discussion of certain other cases. After drawing a distinction between the work of the Conference Committee and that of the Committee of Experts, he indicated that he would review, paragraph by paragraph, the comments made by the Committee of Experts regarding the application of the Convention by India. Finally, he would address a number of procedural issues relating to the work of the Conference Committee.

On the subject of bonded labour, he recalled that Article 2 of the Convention defined forced labour as "work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily". In this respect, he emphasized that for his country even one case of bonded labour was one case too many. He reaffirmed that the Government took very seriously its responsibilities and obligations towards the ILO and under the national Constitution, which explicitly prohibited forced or bonded labour. He recalled that bonded labour had its roots in the two centuries when India had not been free and when, because of the anti-farmer policies pursued, it had suffered from famines regularly every ten years. He was therefore proud that India had managed to move from a situation of recurring famine to that of a country which exported its surplus of agricultural produce mainly as a result of the poverty alleviation policies that it had applied. Cases of bonded labour tended to concern the section of the population which had been most deprived in this context. He added that India had since moved on to become the largest democracy in the world, with a population of 1 billion, 450 million workers and 600 million voters.

Turning to the comments made by the Committee of Experts, he noted that in paragraph 2 of its observation it had expressed the hope that the Government would supply its comments on observations made by certain workers' organizations. He indicated in this respect that a detailed answer had already been supplied and that further information would be provided shortly.

He expressed appreciation that the Committee of Experts had taken note of the positive steps taken by the Government to combat the problems under discussion. In paragraph 7 of its comments, the Committee of Experts had welcomed the increase in the rehabilitation grant from Rs.10,000 to Rs.20,000 for each released bonded labourer. In paragraph 4 it had noted that surveys on bonded labour were being conducted in a total of 57 districts. He informed the Committee in this respect that this number had now increased to 120 districts over the short span of time since the publication of the report of the Committee of Experts. In paragraph 7 of its observation, the Committee of Experts had also welcomed other positive steps taken by the Government, including field visits by senior officials to monitor the utilization of funds for the rehabilitation of bonded labour, the regular reviews by vigilance committees and the efforts made by the National Human Rights Commission to oversee the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, on the instructions of the Supreme Court of India.

With regard to child labour, paragraph 12 of the observation of the Committee of Experts also listed all the positive steps taken by the Government, in particular: the identification of 130,210 children as being employed in hazardous occupations and 392,139 children in non-hazardous occupations; the establishment of child labour rehabilitation and welfare funds at the district level by the state governments concerned; the action taken for the collection of compensation; the penal action initiated against the employers of children; the six new processes added to the Schedule of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, under the hazardous category; and the implementation of the National Child Labour Projects, which were being monitored regularly, so that children could be taken out of work and put into school. He indicated that the Government had allocated 2.5 billion rupees in the 9th Plan and had provided over 6 billion in the 10th National Development Plan on action to help these children.

With regard to the issue of prostitution, mentioned in paragraph 16 of the observation, he said that India was proud of its record, since the national legislation established higher standards than those required by the Convention. Here too, the Committee of Experts had listed the positive measures taken by the Government, including the national plan of action (1998) to combat trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children, the constitution of advisory committees at the national and state levels in order to combat trafficking at the grass-roots level, the establishment of protective homes for girls and women, the ratification of the International Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons and the signing of the SAARC Convention on combating trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children.

However, in view of all the positive steps and progress noted by the Committee of Experts, he expressed surprise at the conclusions that it had reached. The Committee of Experts had raised three points. First, it had noted in paragraph 5 that accurate data was a vital step in both the development of the most effective systems to combat bonded labour and in providing a true base for assessing the effectiveness of those systems. He regretted that this was no more than a self-evident truism. The real issue was whether reliance should be placed on statistics collected in a transparent manner and provided by a democratic country, or on those compiled by some other less reliable forum. He further pointed out that, while the Committee of Experts had noted with interest in paragraph 8 of its observation the information provided by the Government, it had also expressed the opinion that more than 25 years after the adoption of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, the system of bonded labour still existed in the country and that the Government's efforts to eradicate it should be pursued with vigour. While he fully endorsed the second part of this comment, he noted that as a fully democratic Government, India hardly needed any external stimulus to increase its efforts to eradicate the system of bonded labour. As to the first part of the comment, he admitted that some cases of bonded labour did exist in India, just as cases of racism continued to exist in many countries despite the fact that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights had been adopted 50 years ago. He explained that this was because bonded labour was rooted in the issue of socio-economic development and the need to alleviate poverty. Moreover, he indicated that bonded labour was a dynamic concept, which could occur and reoccur, with persons who were freed from bonded labour sometimes returning to it some time later. Moreover, he said that the case of bonded labour was different from that of forced labour. The Indian judiciary, which was socially very proactive, had interpreted the concept of bonded labour rather widely by referring to situations where work was provided for remuneration that was below the level of the minimum wage. Perhaps the real problem in this regard lay in the failure to recognize the distinction between bonded labour and contract labour. He concluded that, rather than the fanciful statistics put forward by some associations, the most important aspect in this respect was the very significant success achieved by the Government through its policy measures in reducing to 26 per cent the numbers of people in the country living below the poverty line. The Committee of Experts had also indicated in paragraph 13 of its observation, with reference to the positive steps taken by the Government, that it noted the Government's commitment to eliminating child labour, as expressed by the Government representative during the discussion at the 2001 Conference Committee, and that it hoped that the Government would pursue its efforts in this field, particularly as regards the identification of working children and the strengthening of the law enforcement machinery. He said that he found this comment unnecessary because the will to move forward came from within the Government itself. While very ready to accept constructive advice on this subject, he objected to the allegations made by certain groups that the Government's statistics were not accurate. These groups had advanced illusory figures concerning millions of persons (between 5 and 20 million bonded labourers, and up to 100 million child labourers). He emphasized in this connection that in an advanced democracy, with a proactive judiciary, a free press and a public litigation system, it would be impossible for a situation of this nature to exist without the Government being brought down. He added that the current system established an incentive structure whereby certain groups of persons were paid in order to identify, sensitize and rehabilitate bonded labourers. It was probable that such groups took advantage of the system by making unsubstantiated allegations. He recalled that under the Indian judicial system, the accuracy of the figures on forced and bonded labour had to be attested by affidavits. Rather than having recourse to the irresponsible practice of publicizing estimates without any firm methodological basis, he called on the groups concerned also to file affidavits with the Supreme Court of India so that independent inquiries could be made into their allegations. He deeply regretted that the Committee of Experts had placed on an equal footing the facts presented by a sovereign Government and the allegations made by such groups, without any indication as to the methodology used or the reliability of the estimates advanced. The lack of any information on methodology was particularly serious in view of the fact that the resources and infrastructure required to conduct a serious survey of millions of people throughout such a vast country as India were immense. Any exercise of such a magnitude would not have gone unnoticed.

With regard to the issue of prostitution, he noted that the Committee of Experts welcomed the positive steps taken by the Government and its commitment to address the problem. But it then went on to say that, although there were a number of studies and reports on commercial sexual exploitation of women and children, there were no reliable estimates of the extent and magnitude of trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation in India. He was puzzled to note that this was the third occasion on which the Committee of Experts had referred to the need for reliable statistics after having welcomed the positive steps taken by the Government. He suggested that the Committee of Experts should perhaps adopt a more pragmatic approach which took into account the practical reality that, where statistics were not complete, it was necessary to proceed on a best endeavour basis and to allocate the resources available in order to do what was possible. In addition to the comments made by the Committee of Experts on the need for statistical information, which could only be classified as a truism, and on the continuing existence of bonded labour, with which he of course agreed, but considered that such situations existed even in advanced economies, he also expressed surprise at the question addressed to the Government as to why there had been no more convictions of those responsible for violating the respective provisions of the law. While a Government should be expected to provide information based on the number of prosecutions made, he was sure that the Committee of Experts, which was composed of eminent jurists, had no real intention of seeking statistics that would prejudge the impartiality of judicial rulings as to whether or not those charged were guilty. He emphasized that the Government's responsibility was to take cases to trial, but that conviction depended upon the independent judiciary on whether the case required an acquittal or a conviction, which only the independent judiciary could determine.

Turning to the second part of his statement, he drew the attention of the Conference Committee to the fact that of the 175 member States of the ILO whose national law and practice was examined in the report of the Committee of Experts, only 25 cases had been selected for discussion by the Conference Committee. Moreover, of those 25 countries, all but one were developing countries. India did not object to its national situation being discussed in human rights bodies, but it was odd, to say the least, that its name had been included on the list of cases this year after all the positive steps that had been noted by the Committee of Experts. Coming from a democratic and federal country, he considered that if the wildest of the allegations referred to in the report of the Committee of Experts were true, no democratic regime would have survived. Perhaps the standards used by those making the allegations were not the ones contained in Convention No. 29. Perhaps the figures really covered persons who were living below the poverty line. He warned that the human tendency to feel superior or more knowledgeable than others should be circumscribed, that the real facts should not be ignored and that care should be taken not to trust in the preconceived ideas of groups which might be motivated by other interests. The Committee would do well to confine itself to the matters directly covered by the Convention.

He added that when the Indian Secretary of Labour had addressed the Committee in 2001, the conclusions adopted had not reflected any of the information that he had provided. Indeed, the conclusions had been adopted immediately after he had finished his statement, without any time being taken to reflect on the content of the discussion. The issue at stake before the Conference Committee was not the comments of the Committee of Experts on the application of the Convention by India. He welcomed these comments, which spoke for themselves, since the Committee of Experts had commended the steps taken by the Government. His primary aim in coming to the Conference Committee had been to determine whether its action was credible and why some countries were included on the list of cases and others were not. He said that although an external stimulus was useful for closed regimes, his country was a well-established democracy and did not need a lecture on human rights. The real question was whether the individuals making allegations against his country had any locus standi and whether their allegations and statistical evidence had been subjected to methodological and objective scrutiny.

He therefore requested the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts to reflect upon how to improve the system. His country was happy for any deficiencies to be pointed out and to take on board suggestions so as to improve its domestic system, but it was also a strong advocate of equity and non-discrimination. His Government considered that allegations emanating from small groups outside the country and which lacked cultural sensitivity should not be accepted without close verification. He hoped that his presence in person would help to drive home the point that the time had come to speak openly about the comments made, the manner in which they were formulated, and the way in which governments fulfilled their responsibilities towards their citizens.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for his exhaustive statement, although they expressed doubt that much new information had been provided. They recalled that this case had been examined by the Conference Committee on ten occasions since 1986, and had been addressed even more frequently in the report of the Committee of Experts. They emphasized that the extent of the problems involved justified this continued attention and recalled the fundamental importance of Convention No. 29, which had achieved the highest rate of ratification of all ILO Conventions. It was no exaggeration to say that the problem was centennial and had important historical origins.

They noted that the Government representative had expressed doubts concerning the statistics mentioned in the report of the Committee of Experts, which had been compiled by non-governmental organizations. However, focusing on figures tended to obscure the important point that even a single case of bonded or forced labour was one too many. In this respect, even the statistics provided by the Government showed that the problem was very serious. Moreover, they noted the statement by the Government representative that accurate statistics were difficult to compile, particularly in view of the different levels of commitment by the various states. The Government representative had indicated that a new effort had been made in this connection, but that some districts were particularly sensitive and that the compilation of data raised social and psychological problems. On this subject, the Employer members concluded that it was necessary to make an intensive effort to compile reliable data as a basis for all further action. The action required risked being badly planned and achieving weak results without an accurate identification of the persons affected and of the extent of the problem.

The Employer members noted the positive developments mentioned by the Government representative, and particularly the rise in the numbers of vigilance committees and the increased level of payments for the release of bonded workers. However, the question remained as to whether, a quarter of a century after the adoption of the main legislation on this subject, more progress should not have been achieved. For example, almost no figures were available concerning the measures taken to charge and punish those responsible for exacting bonded labour. In the biggest democracy in the world, there was a need for an efficient judiciary to ensure that violations of the law were punished.

Turning to the issue of child labour, they regretted to note that once again the situation was not positive. Although the available statistics differed, the Government had indicated that there were 11 million children working in 1991, including in hazardous work, based on the figures of the 1991 census. The results of the 2001 census were not yet available. In comparison with these figures, the results of the action taken to identify children working in hazardous and non-hazardous occupations, as contained in the report of the Committee of Experts, appeared to be very low. It was therefore to be welcomed that the IPEC programme in the country was implementing 160 action programmes covering over 90,000 children, with a view to removing them from work and providing them with education. Although the problem of child labour undoubtedly had historical roots, they agreed with the Government representative that its cause today was the persistent poverty in the country.

With regard to prostitution and sexual exploitation, they noted that the Committee of Experts had welcomed the action taken by the Government and they supported the call made by the Committee of Experts for these efforts to be continued and for the Government to report regularly on their results.

The Employer members indicated that the fact that the issues under discussion had already been examined on so many occasions appeared to result in a feeling of resignation among the members of the Committee. Nevertheless, they expressed the hope that more intensive action would be taken on these matters, but agreed that there was no panacea which could solve these problems in the short term. Their causes were too complex and the country and its population too large for action to be effective immediately. One of the causes was undoubtedly the division in the country between the small formal economy and the very large informal sector. They nevertheless urged the Government to intensify its efforts and to overcome the shortcomings noted in the compilation of statistics. It was only when the facts were known that effective action could be taken. Finally, they recalled that those affected by child labour and bonded labour practices often entered these situations at an early age and would remain in this terrible condition if no action were taken.

The Worker members, referring to the statement of the Government representative, emphasized that they always respected Government representatives and Employer members, but it seemed that the Government representative did not appear to be showing such respect towards the other members of the Committee. Even though problems still had to be solved, in their view, some progress had been made in the case of India. India had ratified the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), in 1954. The Committee of Experts had made its first comments in 1966, and last year, the Committee had again addressed the question of the application of this Convention. However, it had to be said that the process was taking too long.

One of the recurrent problems revealed by the Committee of Experts concerned the lack of precise and reliable statistical information on bonded labour, child labour, prostitution and sexual exploitation. While noting the explanations provided by the Government representative in this regard, the Worker members indicated that statistical information was essential for the correct evaluation of the scope of the problem, particularly with regard to bonded labour. It was incomprehensible that the information provided by the Government on bonded labour, revealing 280,411 bonded labourers, differed considerably from that provided by the ICFTU and other organizations, such as Anti-Slavery International, according to which this number varied between 5 and 20 million. It appeared that the Government was minimizing the extent of the problem, thereby preventing its effective resolution. They supported the requests made by the Committee of Experts concerning the compilation of precise statistical information on the number of persons in bonded labour. The Government should redouble its efforts to eliminate bonded labour in the country.

In its comments, the Committee of Experts had also emphasized the ineffectiveness of the vigilance committees that had to be established pursuant to the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. It had requested the Government to provide information on the number of prosecutions, the number of convictions and the penalties imposed. According to Anti-Slavery International, persons found to be exacting bonded labour were not punished. The information provided by the Government referred to 4,743 prosecutions under the 1976 Act. In this respect, the Committee of Experts had observed that, in the light of Article 25 of the Convention, this number appeared to be inadequate in comparison with the potential number of bonded labourers. The Worker members insisted that the Government provide the information requested by the Committee of Experts so that it could examine the effectiveness of the measures taken and their application. According to the Government's statement, the governments of the different states of India were responsible for the application of the 1976 Act with a view to identifying and releasing bonded labourers. Nevertheless, the central Government had to ensure that the different states exercised their responsibility. Even though the Committee of Experts had found that positive steps had been taken, the Worker members insisted that a joint project should be established between the central Government and the governments of states in order to achieve the required results.

Referring to child labour, the Committee of Experts had noted information from the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) and the concluding observations of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child made in February 2000. In its concluding observations, the Committee on the Rights of the Child had expressed concern "at the large numbers of children involved in child labour, including bonded labour, especially in the informal sector, household enterprises, as domestic servants, and in agriculture, many of whom are working in hazardous conditions". In June 2002, the ICFTU had transmitted its observations to the Committee of Experts. According to these observations, estimates of the numbers of children working in India varied between 22 and 50 million, and the efforts to reduce child labour had not yet had much impact and were considered to be inadequate in view of the scale of the problem. The Government had not responded to these observations. The Worker members noted the positive steps taken, but urged the Government to continue its efforts.

The Committee of Experts had expressed great concern at child labour in the informal sector. In this regard, the Government had indicated that it had no intention of extending the coverage of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, or the Factories Act, 1948. This was why it was essential to adopt legislative provisions and to strengthen the machinery for the application of the legislation so that children working in the informal sector were also covered by these laws.

With regard to prostitution and sexual exploitation, the Committee of Experts had welcomed the action taken by the Government, particularly in reviewing the existing legal framework with a view to applying more severe penalties to traffickers, enacting legislation to prohibit Devdasi and Jogin traditions of sexual exploitation, and ratification by India of the International Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children. The Worker members expressed their support for these measures and emphasized the need for their practical implementation. They hoped that next year the Government would provide all the necessary information in this regard. They requested the Government to take the necessary measures to compile reliable statistical information so that a programme of effective action against forced labour, child labour, prostitution and sexual exploitation could be developed. Despite the progress made, the Government should redouble its efforts to resolve the problem in an effective manner. Finally, they recalled that the Government could request the technical assistance of the ILO.

The Worker member of Colombia indicated that, even though India was a country located far from Colombia and from Latin America, this did not constitute an insurmountable obstacle to expressing solidarity with the serious situation that affected workers, due to the permanent violations of Convention No. 29 by those who abused their economic, political and social powers. He added that the Committee of Experts had provided a very complete picture of this human tragedy which affected several million human beings, seriously compromising the future of the country.

Bonded labour, prostitution and the sexual exploitation of women and children deserved the full attention of the Government and the information provided by the Government on the measures taken to combat this calamity, which caused immense suffering to millions of families, was therefore encouraging. He added that it would be very valuable to strengthen the efforts to eradicate this problem. He emphasized that the efforts and actions taken by the Government should enjoy the real support of the international community, and principally of the industrial countries, which possessed sufficient resources to help this country and the poorest people who were the victims of these violations. It was unacceptable in the twenty-first century that humanity had to observe without taking any action the exploitation of those who, by their conditions of poverty, were reduced to slavery to allow the illegal enrichment of a minority which did not respect the right to freedom of their own brothers. Finally, he emphasized that a country that was incapable of applying and ensuring compliance with Convention No. 29 had no future.

The Employer member of India emphasized that, with issues as important as child labour and forced labour, both employers and governments needed to show their commitment and explain the action that was being taken, as the Government representative had done at length. However, the discussion of this case raised a number of important issues, including that of the reliability of statistical information. When the Government of India, with all its technical expertise and administrative machinery, undertook surveys which concluded that there had been 2.8 million bonded labourers, of whom 2.5 million had been rehabilitated, why should the Committee of Experts lend credence to wild estimates which placed the numbers of bonded and forced labourers at many millions of persons. Organizations which put forward such allegations should give proof that they were well-founded, for example by swearing affidavits before the Supreme Court of India, as the chief secretaries of Indian states had to do concerning the statistics that they produced. It was necessary to preserve tripartism from being held to ransom by civil society. Indeed, as the Government was undertaking vigorous campaigns to eradicate these problems and had the necessary legislative and constitutional provisions to make them illegal, there were serious grounds for wondering why this case had been examined by the Committee on many occasions for the past two decades. Most of the other cases examined by the Committee consisted of clear discrepancies between the provisions of the respective Convention and the national legislation. This was clearly not true with regard to the application of Convention No. 29 by India and he therefore hoped that this matter would not be examined again by the Committee.

The Worker member of India reaffirmed that bonded and forced labour were a great blemish on humanity that needed to be eradicated as soon as possible. Recalling that the Government of India had ratified the Convention in 1954 and adopted the main legislation implementing it in 1976, he explained that labour was a concurrent subject in his country, although the basic responsibility for labour matters lay with the state governments. However, the states were at different stages of development and showed great disparities in terms of education, health and industrial development. Both bonded and forced labour were directly related to the high levels of poverty and unemployment in the country and had their origins in its legacy of imperialist exploitation. In this respect, he recalled that such important issues would never be resolved in isolation and that the real remedy lay in providing employment and a respectable livelihood to every able-bodied citizen. For this to be achieved, it was necessary for production to be based on sustainable technology which respected the dignity of workers, ecology and the rights of consumers. However, the over-hasty pursuit of rapid development inevitably led to the use of unsustainable technology, resulting in jobless growth. This was the basic problem which required immediate attention.

He indicated that the trade unions and Government of India, as well as the Supreme Court, were all united in their determination to bring an end to forced and bonded labour. However, he warned that the issue was being blown out of proportion by certain parties for ulterior motives. The figures for bonded labour put forward by the Government could not be false, since the Government was answerable for them to the democratically elected Parliament. In 2001, the Government representative had challenged those who claimed that the figures were much higher to raise the issue before the Indian courts, but they had been afraid to do so. He warned that those who wished to malign the country should not be encouraged and said that the application of Convention No. 29 by his country had been discussed on too many occasions.

The Government member of Sweden, also speaking on behalf of the Government members of Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Norway, emphasized that the Nordic Governments were very committed to combating child labour, not least through their extensive support for the ILO-IPEC programme. She therefore welcomed the Government of India's efforts to address child labour and its commitment to eliminating it. She emphasized the urgency of providing accurate data as a basis for estimating the extent of bonded labour, child labour and sexual exploitation in the country. Such data would enable the Government to develop effective systems to combat these serious problems and would provide a realistic basis for assessing the effectiveness of such systems. She called upon the Government to pursue its efforts in this field, particularly with regard to the identification of working children. Finally, she encouraged the Government to reinforce the legislative provisions and strengthen the law enforcement machinery as soon as possible, emphasizing that legislation along with socio-economic measures were vital for the effective eradication of hazardous forms of child labour and the sexual exploitation of children.

The Government member of Guatemala expressed his appreciation for the frank and direct statement by the Government representative of India. He shared the concerns expressed by India with respect to the criteria for the compilation of the list of countries called upon to enter into dialogue with the Committee, and in general with regard to its methods of work. The same sentiment had been expressed by the delegations of Venezuela and Cuba in a previous sitting. He emphasized the need to include this subject on the agenda of the Committee at the next session of the International Labour Conference, as well as to continue and extend tripartite consultations in this regard.

The Government member of Cuba expressed her gratitude and appreciation for the explanations of the Government representative of India. She stated that there was no reason to doubt the explanations of the Government representative with regard to statistics, which had to be the subject of rational analysis. Referring to paragraph 11 of the observation of the Committee of Experts concerning the application of the Convention in the country, she expressed her surprise that it included the comments of an international organization to which the Government had not had an opportunity to respond, and which moreover referred to a point on which the Committee of Experts had acknowledged the progress achieved. She considered it inexcusable to publicize such comments without waiting for the response of the Government. She recalled that the report of the Committee of Experts contained other similar cases, but that they had been treated with more discretion, and that the approach adopted in the present case did not constitute an impartial and objective examination of the question.

A Worker member of France referring to the statement made by the Government representative of Cuba indicated that the non-governmental organizations in question had consultative status with the United Nations and that they participated in the work of the Committee on Human Rights and its Subcommittee.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom referring to personal experience in India visiting child labour projects and observing the action of the ILO, trade unions, employers, government officials and NGOs, described the highly beneficial effects of liberating children from work, including bonded labour, and the great opportunities offered to them by the possibility of attending school. Those who had experienced the harsh reality of child and bonded labour, and who were subsequently freed and educated, became advocates of universal education and staunch opponents of child labour. Although the freedom enjoyed by the lucky ones was theoretically a right, it was in practice a hard fought for treasure. Millions of children in the country remained in bondage and the progress made in the elimination of bonded labour was too slow. The statistics compiled by such reputable organizations as Anti-Slavery International and Human Rights Watch, which enjoyed observer status with the United Nations, showed that the figures given by the Government were much too low. He emphasized that effective national policy required a far more reliable statistical basis and recommended that the Government seek expert ILO assistance in this regard. He added that, in view of the overwhelming prevalence of child labour in the informal economy and in agriculture, the Government's refusal to extend the Child Labour and Factories Acts to these sectors amounted to a dereliction of its moral and legal duty. In response to the Government's claim that the abolition of child labour required a holistic anti-poverty approach, rather than coercive and inspection mechanisms, he emphasized that it needed both. As indicated by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, promotional and development approaches could not function outside or replace the rule of law. He therefore called for labour inspection to be expanded and strengthened and for multi-agency and tripartite cooperation to be developed. While India was the world's largest democratic federal republic, practice varied widely at the state level. For example, Kerala remained one of the world's best examples of universal basic education and the effective abolition of child labour. Although poor, it had demonstrated a wealth of political will. Effective action had also been taken for the elimination of child labour in certain sectors in other states. However, others suffered from severe deficiencies in education and had a patchy record in the prevention and eradication of child labour and bonded labour. These different levels of success were illustrated by the wide variance in the efficacy of vigilance committees, the extent of political will and the rule of law. He called on the Government and the ILO to pay greater attention to the huge inconsistency in tripartite concerted action. It was the central Government's responsibility to overcome obstacles presented by state governments. The elimination of child labour required the sustainable protection of working people through the enforcement of good laws and through organization, collective bargaining and social dialogue. In conclusion, he said that India required an authoritative, competent and comprehensive survey of bonded labour, as well as vigilance committees and district magistrates that were trained and willing to enforce the law. He also called upon the Government to ratify and apply the ILO's other fundamental Conventions with a view to supporting the eradication of bonded labour, trafficking and child labour.

The Government representative thanked those who had taken the floor and felt encouraged by most of the comments made. With reference to the remarks of the Employer members, he specified that the figure of 280,000 bonded labourers given by the Government was of the bonded labourers as of 1976 when the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act was passed. This has now been reduced by 260,000, who had been released, with only the balance remaining in bonded labour. He reiterated that in a democratic system such as the one in his own country it would be impossible to conceal a problem of the magnitude alleged by some of the most extravagant figures put forward by various groups, which should be subjected to close scrutiny. He added that, despite some of the suggestions made, his country had the necessary technical expertise to address the problems under review and did not require technical assistance. He reaffirmed that his country was deeply committed to the elimination of child labour and had spent very large sums of money on action for this purpose. The Prime Minister of India had himself announced the Government's intention to eliminate child labour to a substantial extent in the current five-year plan. In view of the size of the country, it should not be forgotten that action at the district level, for example, could affect a population equivalent to that of some smaller European countries. Although the observation of the Committee of Experts had referred frequently to the action programmes undertaken by IPEC, it should not therefore be forgotten that the investment made by the Indian Government was of a different order of magnitude. The Indian Government had committed more than US$55 million between 1997 and 2002, and over US$115 million in the current plan (2002-07), whereas ILO/IPEC had spent only US$5 million in the last ten years in the country. The work of the Government of India should therefore be seen in this perspective.

Turning to the question of the procedure followed by the Committee, he said that before the next session of the Conference, his Government would take the lead in opening up the discussion on this matter by raising a number of fundamental questions, such as why the representatives of a handful of countries occupied so many important positions. It was necessary for reflection to go forward on this matter so that the credibility of the institution was not undermined.

Finally, he reaffirmed the responsible attitude of his Government and recalled that it was answerable to the national Parliament and local government bodies. He emphasized that it was only necessary to consult the annual report of the Ministry of Labour to find reliable statistics of the numbers of bonded labourers identified and rehabilitated. He added that his country boasted a record on certain human rights issues which could not be bettered by some of the most industrialized countries in the world, such as the fact that one-third of all positions in decentralized local self-government reaching down to 500,000 villages were reserved for women.

Another Government member of France strongly opposed the statements made by the Government representative of India questioning the impartiality of the ILO secretariat and referring to the dominance of certain nationalities. He added that this type of argument should not be used in the Committee.

The Employer members recalled that the matter under examination was of a very serious nature and regretted that the Government representative had used the occasion to make a political statement, without focusing on the subject under discussion. They noted the rejection by the Government representative of the high figures for forced and bonded labour mentioned in the statistics communicated by non-governmental organizations. However, they recalled that the Government representatives who had addressed the Committee in previous years had often placed emphasis on the difficulty of producing accurate statistics, particularly in view of the different levels of technical expertise and commitment of the various states. They concluded that a great deal remained to be done to resolve the problems under discussion and emphasized that the Government of India was responsible to the ILO for the implementation of the Conventions that it had ratified.

The Worker members indicated that the statement made by the Government representative questioned the impartiality of the Committee of Experts and the Committee on the Application of Standards, as well as the competence of the officials of the Organization. They recalled that it was necessary to compile precise and reliable statistical information on the number of persons still working in bondage. Child labour, particularly in the informal sector, remained a matter of concern, and the Government had to redouble its efforts to eliminate this practice. Furthermore, the scope of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, and the Factories Act, 1948, should be extended to the informal sector. They called upon the Government to ratify and apply Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 in the very near future. In conclusion, the Worker members recalled that the Government could always request the technical assistance of the ILO.

The Government representative explained that a first version of the Committee's conclusions, which had initially been read out by the Chairperson, had erred in the fact that some sections represented the views of the Committee, while others purported to reflect the views of the Government. He denied, for example, that he had in any way acknowledged the weakness of the statistical base in his country and he reaffirmed that the national statistics were comprehensive and complete. Those who alleged the opposite based their allegations on constant repetition rather than on any well-founded reasoning. Indeed, some of the most fanciful statistics proposed were clearly preposterous. The position of his Government was not to deny the existence of forced and bonded labour, but to reaffirm that the problem was being addressed with full vigour and was being substantially reduced. He added that the calls made by the Committee for the Government to take more strenuous action in this regard were gratuitous, as the Government was in any case doing its utmost. He therefore called upon the Committee to assume the responsibility for its views and to weigh its words with great care. Finally, he said that he had no particular criticism of the report of the Committee of Experts, but that he questioned the practices of the present Committee. For example, the Committee's credibility would be strengthened if its conclusions were formulated in association with the Government representative concerned, rather than just with the spokespersons of the Employer and Worker members.

The Worker members proposed that the Committee should merely note the last statement by the Government representative.

The Committee noted the information provided by his Excellency the Ambassador and the discussion that followed. The Committee considered that this was a serious case of repeated failure to implement a fundamental Convention. It recalled that the Committee had decided that it would discuss this case in view of its serious nature and magnitude and the comments that had been received from workers' organizations on many occasions. The Committee commended the positive measures adopted by the Government and its commitment to address the problem, as well as the important role of the Supreme Court of India. The Committee therefore urged the Government to continue its efforts with renewed vigour in order to eradicate bonded labour in the country and combat child forced labour in the framework of the present Convention, especially in the informal sector, and the sexual exploitation of children. The Committee emphasized that it was vital to develop and reinforce the legal provisions and to strengthen the machinery for the implementation of the legislation, along with socio-economic measures for the effective eradication of bonded labour and child labour. The Committee noted the fragility of the statistical system and the efforts made to correct such deficiencies. The Committee expressed the firm hope that the Government's next report to the Committee of Experts would contain detailed information on the action taken, the progress made and the measures adopted to reinforce the statistical system and that the full implementation of the Convention would be ensured in law as well as in practice.

The Government representative explained that a first version of the Committee's conclusions, which had initially been read out by the Chairperson, had erred in the fact that some sections represented the views of the Committee, while others purported to reflect the views of the Government. He denied, for example, that he had in any way acknowledged the weakness of the statistical base in his country and he reaffirmed that the national statistics were comprehensive and complete. Those who alleged the opposite based their allegations on constant repetition rather than on any well-founded reasoning. Indeed, some of the most fanciful statistics proposed were clearly preposterous. The position of his Government was not to deny the existence of forced and bonded labour, but to reaffirm that the problem was being addressed with full vigour and was being substantially reduced. He added that the calls made by the Committee for the Government to take more strenuous action in this regard were gratuitous, as the Government was in any case doing its utmost. He therefore called upon the Committee to assume the responsibility for its views and to weigh its words with great care. Finally, he said that he had no particular criticism of the report of the Committee of Experts, but that he questioned the practices of the present Committee. For example, the Committee's credibility would be strengthened if its conclusions were formulated in association with the Government representative concerned, rather than just with the spokespersons of the Employer and Worker members.

The Worker members proposed that the Committee should merely note the last statement by the Government representative.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2001, Publication: 89th ILC session (2001)

A Government representative informed the Committee that a detailed report in accordance with article 22 of the Constitution for the period 1 June 1998 to 31 May 1999, covering the observations made in 1998 and 1999 by the Committee of Experts and comments of the Conference Committee in 2000 had been sent to the ILO in January 2001. He regretted the delay, which had meant that the report had not been taken into account in the observation of the Committee of Experts. The report had contained the information called for in an exhaustive and comprehensive manner. Indeed, the information had been obtained from no less than 28 states and seven union territories, and no fewer than eight central trade union organizations and employers' organizations had been consulted, along with central ministries and departments. The delay should not therefore be attributed to any lack of interest or commitment. With regard to bonded labour, he emphasized that there was absolutely no reason to assume that the Government did not have the will nor the intent to abolish it. Moreover, the Government had the machinery and infrastructure to reach down to the grassroots to do so. He said that vigilance committees were the most appropriate mechanisms for the identification of bonded labour, with the central Government's role consisting of the coordination of a national policy on bonded labour, while responsibility for the implementation of the policies rested with the states. The Government's commitment to eradicate the problem was borne out by article 23 of the Constitution, which prohibited the trafficking of humans, begging and other similar forms of forced labour. India had ratified Convention No. 29 way back in 1954. The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, provided for the abolition of the system of bonded labour and freed unilaterally all bonded labourers from bondage, with the simultaneous liquidation of their debts. The Supreme Court of India had directed the National Human Rights Commission to oversee and supervise the implementation of the Act and the progress made by state governments. The legislative provisions and related actions therefore amply demonstrated the country's commitment to eliminate bonded labour. However, he emphasized that the problem of bonded labour was closely linked to the broader socio-economic problems of unemployment, landlessness, poverty and migration. It therefore required a holistic and integrated approach so that the various developmental efforts could be concentrated on the most deprived sections of society, which were clearly most vulnerable to bondage. India's massive anti-poverty programmes were geared to serve just such groups, and they not only prevented bondage but also helped the rehabilitation process. A specific scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers was also being implemented and had been updated with increased levels of assistance since May 2000. Between 1998-99 and 31 March 2001, a total of 14,390 freed bonded labourers from seven states had been rehabilitated under the scheme. He added that landmark judgements of the very proactive Supreme Court had had far-reaching implications for the definition of forced labour. Under the terms of the Convention, the term "forced or compulsory labour" meant "all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily". In the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, bonded labour was defined as a service rendered by a person or his family members under compulsion to another to pay off a debt and who as a consequence had been denied freedom of movement, choice of employment and the right to sell his property or products at market rates. Both definitions covered the coercion aspect, although the latter emphasized indebtedness and an unequal exchange system. However, the Supreme Court judgements went far beyond the stipulations of the Convention. In 1982, the Court had given its opinion that, where a person provided labour or service to another for remuneration less than the minimum wage, the labour or service fell clearly within the scope and ambit of the words "forced labour" under the Constitution. In 1984, it had found that whenever it was shown that a labourer was made to provide forced labour, the court would raise the presumption that he was required to do so in consideration of an advance or other economic consideration received by him and was therefore a bonded labourer. Also in 1984, it had found that whenever a person was forced to provide labour for no remuneration or nominal remuneration, the presumption would be that this was a bonded labourer, unless the employer or the state government was in a position to prove otherwise. It should therefore be noted that the Supreme Court decisions presumed bondage even if there was no indebtedness of any kind, and even if the person had offered himself voluntarily but was being paid less than the minimum wage. This went far beyond the definition of forced labour in the Convention. He said that this was presumably the cause of the confusion in the minds of observers, who tend to apply these judgements to the implementation of the Convention. He expressed pride in the tradition of his country of being ahead but warned that much more would be involved in complying with the judgements of the Supreme Court and further work would therefore be required. This question was being monitored regularly by the Supreme Court. However, with regard to the implementation of the Convention, which was the concern of the Conference Committee, India should be treated in the same way as other countries based on the definition of forced labour laid down in the Convention.

Turning to the first point raised in the report of the Committee of Experts concerning the necessity to compile accurate statistics of the number of bonded labourers, and the Conference Committee's view that the Government should undertake a comprehensive and authoritative survey, he noted that reference had been made to the statistics on bonded labour quoted by the Gandhi Peace Foundation in 1978-79. However, he said that the Government was unable to accept the figures of bonded labour quoted by the Foundation, since no approved statistical tools or methodology had been adopted for collecting the primary data. The Foundation had estimated the number of bonded labourers at 2.6 million on the basis of a survey based on a random sample drawn from around 450,000 villages in ten selected states, from which 1,000 villages had finally been selected. Every 450th village in the census list of villages of each state had been selected. It was not known if the sampling was representative in terms of the population. The findings of the survey in respect of the above 1,000 villages had been projected by multiplying by 450 to arrive at the total number of bonded labourers in ten states. As the methodology was not acceptable, the Government had had to reject the findings. He stated that under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, the identification and release of bonded labourers and their rehabilitation was the direct responsibility of the concerned state governments. The central Government had advised the state governments to conduct periodic surveys, in the form of household surveys undertaken by the Revenue Department, during the survey/census undertaken to identify target groups for the allotment of house sites and/or houses, or through surveys integrated with preparations of village plans under the integrated rural development programmes. On the basis of such surveys, the governments of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Haryana and Gujarat had reported the identification of 251,424 bonded labourers up to 1995, of which 230,915 had been rehabilitated. The remaining bonded labourers were not available for rehabilitation. All the state governments had stated in their affidavits filed with the Supreme Court in 1995 that all the identified bonded labourers who were available had been rehabilitated in their states. To verify these statements, the Supreme Court had nominated a voluntary organization and an advocate for each state, while the Government had issued an order to conduct a fresh survey to identify bonded labourers. Surveys had therefore been conducted by all the state governments in October-December 1996. As a result of these surveys, seven state governments (Arunachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya, Pradesh, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh and Tamil Nadu) had identified 28,916 bonded labourers. The remaining state governments had again filed affidavits with the Supreme Court to the effect that no incidence of bonded labour had been found in their states during the survey. He emphasized that the existence of bonded labour could occur and reoccur at any time in any industry or occupation. Continuous vigilance and surveillance were therefore required, backed up by institutional arrangements for complaints/grievances received from those who worked and lived under conditions of bondage. In May 2000, the Government had modified the centrally sponsored scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labour. It now provided for 100 per cent financial assistance to be provided to state governments to conduct surveys of bonded labour. Each state government was required to identify sensitive districts where the system of bonded labour was reported to exist in one form or another. Such surveys were required to be conducted on a regular basis once every three years in such districts. Under the scheme, financial assistance had been provided to several state governments in 2000-01 to conduct such surveys in 25 districts. During the current financial year 2001-02, financial assistance had been provided for surveys in 32 more districts. The remaining state governments were being requested to send proposals for conducting surveys in sensitive districts. The modified scheme also provided for grants for the creation of awareness and evaluatory studies and surveys, and the preparation of five evaluatory studies by state governments every year of the impact of existing land-debt relationships affecting bonded labourers and the effectiveness of poverty alleviation programmes and the financial assistance provided. He emphasized that the information from the surveys received by the Government provided authentic and reliable statistics on the system of bonded labour. The evaluatory studies would give an idea of the performance of the programmes and suggest corrective measures. It should be noted in this respect that the efforts to eliminate the problem were backed by a strong commitment, supportive action and the resolution to create a genuine database in the face of tremendous difficulties in identifying bonded labour in the first place. The figures on bonded labour had been furnished to Parliament and had not been rebutted by any NGO before the Supreme Court.

With regard to the comments made concerning the non-functioning of vigilance committees, he said that the state governments had stated that vigilance committees had been constituted at the district and subdivisional levels and that meetings were held regularly. However, it was possible that, considering the number of districts and the many functions of district functionaries, there might be some instances when vigilance committees did not meet regularly, although this was not widespread. With the modified scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers, funds would be available to raise public awareness and the various surveys would involve continuous field visits by the members of the vigilance committees at the district and subdivisional levels, as well as institutional arrangements to receive complaints and grievances from those who work and live under conditions of bondage. There were 172 sensitive districts in 13 states where incidents of bonded labour were reported frequently. Surveys and awareness-raising activities would be undertaken with a view to bringing conceptual clarity to the definition of bonded labour, bonded debt and the different forms of the bonded labour system in the country. There was a need for constant efforts to inculcate a sense of individual and social identity in the minds of the socially and economically deprived of their basic legitimate rights. This would require certain time-bound programmes and activities at the district and subdivisional levels, and the use of existing public relations machinery, as well as innovative activities, such as street plays and local folk theatre to emphasize and propagate the absolute unacceptability of the bonded labour system, which was a negation of human rights. Local talent and NGOs working in the area would be encouraged to support and contribute to these activities. Moreover, the rehabilitation grant had been doubled and the state governments would provide matching grants under the modified scheme. These changes had been made after consultations with the state governments. As they had taken effect in May 2000, it was too early to provide information on the responses and action taken by the states. However, the scheme should not be seen in isolation. Its performance was closely linked to that of other poverty-reduction programmes. He was optimistic that the scheme would achieve notable progress in the next few years. However, he warned that achievements could never be measured solely in numbers, in view of the extreme sensitivity of the problem and the silence that often disguised bondage. In the end, it would be through empowerment in every sense of the word that the pernicious practice would be eliminated. Although actual numbers relating to prevention would never be available, what would be seen would be the gradual dissipation of the problem with the reduction of poverty and increased awareness and general confidence building.

In paragraph 4 of its report, the Committee of Experts had requested written information on the progress achieved. In addition to the changes in the scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labour, he indicated that, to review and monitor progress in the implementation of the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976, senior officers had visited Chennai, Bangalore, Betiah, Bagaha, Madhubani, Saharsa and Patna between July 1999 to April 2000, as well as to monitor the utilization of funds released for the rehabilitation of bonded labour. Following discussions with the officers of the state governments dealing with the rehabilitation of bonded labour, they had been advised to use funds from other poverty-alleviation programmes for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers to enable them to obtain maximum assistance in regaining their material status and identities. He added that a meeting had been held with the representatives of state governments in April 2000 to review the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and the scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers. It had been decided to conduct fresh surveys, identify bonded labour, issue release certificates as soon as bonded labourers were identified, make arrangements for their repatriation in case of migrant workers, formulate proposals for psychological and economic rehabilitation at a place of their choice and initiate action against the employers under the Act. For this purpose, it had been emphasized that vigilance committees at the districts and subdivisional levels should meet regularly in accordance with the Act and continuously monitor the incidence of bonded labour in their areas. By 31 March 1999, a total of 243,375 bonded labourers had been rehabilitated and an amount of Rs.464,985 million had been released to state governments under the scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers. In 1999-2000, Rs.38.2 million had been released and 8,195 bonded labourers rehabilitated in four states. In 2000-01, Rs.86.5 million had been released to three state governments for the release of 5,256 bonded labourers. He added that the National Human Rights Commission oversaw and supervised the implementation of the 1976 Act on the instructions of the Supreme Court. A central action group had been constituted in August 1998 under the chairmanship of a former Chief Justice of India. The group had so far held four meetings. Finally, he noted that the information requested regarding the release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, reports of visits of senior officials, a copy of review meetings and other available papers had already been sent to the ILO.

In paragraph 5 of its observations the Committee of Experts had referred to the ILO project developed as a direct response to the adoption of Convention No. 182 and the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and had hoped that it would be of assistance to the Government in combating bonded labour. He said that the project was to be implemented in three states. He expressed support for the initiative and, if it worked well, a model could be developed for its replication or application with modifications to other areas.

He then turned to some comments made by Worker and Employer members. One Employer member had requested information on the number of federal and civil servants working on a day-to-day basis on the identification and eradication of bonded labour. In response, he said that it was very difficult to provide government officials exclusively to deal with the subject of bonded labour, since they were also responsible for other matters, such as the enforcement of other labour laws and other important executive functions which enable them to exercise their influence on the work relating to bonded labour in an executive manner, for example, in the case of Collectors and Sub-Divisional Officers. An Employer member had stated that the phenomenon of bonded labour had increased with the rise in population, that the number of persons living below the poverty line had risen and that the Government's policies did not address the problems, but only added to poverty in rural areas. However, the Government representative said that there was no basis for such an assumption and, as shown by the latest survey in 2000, poverty levels had declined from 40 to 26 per cent. With regard to the alleged increase in bonded labour, he recalled that the affidavits filed by state governments before the Supreme Court in 1995 had stated that bonded labourers had been rehabilitated. New surveys conducted in 1996 had resulted in only two state governments, namely Arunachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, identifying 28,916 bonded labourers, while the remaining state governments had indicated that there was no incidence of bonded labour in their states. Nor had the Government come across any complaints that bonded labourers had returned to bondage. Referring to the comments made by a Worker member concerning letters alleging the prevalence and perpetuation of bonded labour in the state of Punjab, and particularly concerning the rape of a girl who had been working with her mother, he said that the allegations had been taken up at the highest level. It had been found that the complainants had been working in the houses of some farmers and providing domestic services on their own volition and in the houses of their choice. There was therefore no cause to consider them as bonded labourers, as they were working of their own choice and will. However, the case of rape had been confirmed and compensation and legal aid had been provided to the victim. With regard to the issue of child labour, he stressed that concern for children and the problem of child labour continued to be an area of great concern and commitment of successive governments. Census data for 1991 had estimated that the number of children working in the country was in the order of 11.28 million. The results of the census held early this year were still awaited. He recalled that, following the adoption of a resolution by the ILO in 1979 on child labour, a national policy on child labour had been announced in 1987, consisting of a legislative plan, the focusing of general development programmes on children whenever possible, and the formulation of project-based action plans in areas of the high concentration of child labour engaged in wage and quasi-wage employment. The Ministry of Labour had launched the National Child Labour Projects (NCLP) in 1988 for the rehabilitation of child labour in the country. He noted in this connection that the number of NCLP districts had increased to 100 this year, the number of occupations and processes where child labour had been banned had increased to 70 this year from the figure of 64 the previous year, the outlay for child labour elimination programmes had been raised to Rs.670 million this year from its level of Rs.360 million in the last financial year or an increase of over 86 per cent, and the increased emphasis placed on up-scaling efforts both financially and programmatically in the next five-year plan to cover all the endemic districts in the country which had not yet been taken up. The objective would be to bring new approaches to the projects, including a strong effort for the convergence of all social welfare schemes in such areas as education, health and income generation activities. Gaps in existing schemes were being identified with a view to initiating new approaches through a detailed evaluation exercise of all the projects in the country. Implementation mechanisms would be internalized and strengthened, and successful models being implemented by NGOs would be replicated, with emphasis on project activities which involved the mainstreaming of children into the formal education and schooling system. The Government was also examining the possibility of filling gaps in existing projects through schemes such as enhanced vocational training, regular health checks and other important social interventions for children attending the schools set up under the projects. A few initiatives had also been launched in the form of IPEC-assisted projects in the states most affected by child labour. He indicated that these formed part of the Government's continuous efforts to ensure that schools opened for children involved in hazardous work not only took them away from their place of work but also equipped them to become self-reliant and provided them with the opportunities to better themselves. The Government believed that the only way to eliminate child labour was to mainstream children into formal schools, where they could be provided with education and the chance to choose their preferred vocation. He also informed the Committee that the examination of Convention No. 182 was at an advanced stage and would be submitted to an inter-ministerial committee in the near future, with a view to expediting the procedures for its ratification.

Turning to the problem of prostitution and sexual exploitation, he emphasized that there existed a strong legal framework in India to deal with the crimes of immoral trafficking and prostitution of persons, including children, and that his Government had a strong will and commitment to address the problem. The basic legal measure was the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act 1956. The Supreme Court had also delivered two important decisions on this subject, which had strengthened efforts to deal effectively with the phenomenon. The Government planned the establishment of a Central Cell in the Ministry of Home Affairs with a view to monitoring and coordinating the action taken by the different national agencies and programmes for the prevention, rescue and rehabilitation of women and child victims. The Government was also preparing a manual containing guidelines for the judiciary and police regarding cases pertaining to the trafficking of women and children, with a view to securing speedier justice for them and ensuring more stringent action against traffickers, under the aegis of the National Human Rights Commission and the Department of Women and Child Development. He emphasized that prostitution and trafficking were of great concern to the Government. Since the incidence of prostitution was related to the low status of women in society, it would be difficult to take real action to combat the problem unless progress was made in the economic empowerment of women. The Government was therefore implementing various programmes for this purpose, including a programme to provide microcredit to poor women in the informal sector. A number of support services had been developed, including short-stay homes, crèches and family counselling centres. Awareness programmes for women had also been established to disseminate information on their rights. His Government had demonstrated its commitment in this respect by ratifying the international Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children. India had also drafted a regional convention on the prevention and combating trafficking of women and children for the purposes of prostitution. His Government had also taken the lead in seeking the cooperation of Nepal and Bangladesh in combating the trafficking of persons.

In conclusion, he emphasized that his Government had continued to provide written and oral reports to the ILO on the questions raised by the supervisory bodies. His country had adopted an open attitude to the question and had set up the necessary institutional arrangements. It had always shown its willingness to cooperate with the ILO and he hoped that the Committee would take into account that it was an open and democratic society, with an independent judiciary and total freedom of expression. Few developing countries could boast these advantages. He therefore called for the understanding and the appreciation of the Committee in relation to the problems experienced and called upon it not to overlook the need to address the underlying causes of the problems, which lay principally in the large-scale unemployment in the country and the very large informal sector. Without effective action to combat poverty, it would be very difficult to tackle these problems effectively.

The Employer members agreed with the Government representative that the problems of bonded labour and child labour needed to be seen in the center of the broad picture of national development. Although the Government clearly had a whole range of structures in place to address these issues, no amount of structures would be effective in addressing the much larger economic issues of development and poverty eradication. The problems faced included a small formal sector and a large informal sector in the country. The Employer members noted that, despite the provision of some new information this year, there was an abiding impression that very little had changed in the case over the many years that it had been examined by the Committee. It had been unfortunate in that respect that the Government's report had arrived after the meeting of the Committee of Experts. The Employer members noted the statement of the Government representative that the necessary legislative structure was in place and that priority was given to rehabilitation schemes and to the work of vigilance committees in identifying bonded labourers for rehabilitation. However, it was understandable that such mechanisms might not work uniformly well in such a vast country. Although the Committee had been examining the case for a number of years, it was still confronted with widely ranging estimates of the extent of bonded labour. They emphasized that reliable statistics were necessary to define the scope of the problem and the strategies needed to address it. Despite the fact that the Government had not accepted the figures provided by the Gandhi Peace Foundation, the impression remained that the Government had not established the necessary structures to identify the real scope of the problem. It was for this reason that the Government had been requested to put in place a comprehensive and authoritative survey. An additional problem appeared to concern the lack of a precise conceptual definition of bonded labour, with the interpretations of the Supreme Court envisaging the issue in a much broader manner than the definitions contained in the Convention. Clarification was therefore required as to the concepts used by the Government in the figures that it had provided for bonded labour. Were these based on the definition in the Convention or on the broader concept developed by the Supreme Court? The Employer members emphasized that, in the absence of reliable statistics, it was unclear whether the bonded labour problem was increasing or decreasing. Moreover, the Government appeared to have no adequate means of rehabilitating bonded labourers. They wondered whether the ILO project to which reference had been made could be of assistance in this respect. The Employer members added that it did not appear that the Government's efforts were succeeding in eliminating child labour. The Committee of Experts had called for changes in the child labour legislation, but the Government representative had not addressed this issue. While welcoming the future ratification by India of Convention No. 182, the Employer members recalled that, even if all the necessary laws and regulations were in place, if the situation was not solved in practice, the Government would not have complied with the Convention. Noting the figures provided the previous year that there were between 70,000 and 100,000 prostitutes in India, the Employer members referred to the explanations provided by the Government representative that this situation was largely due to poverty and unemployment, and that the legislation was in place to prevent the trafficking in women and children. They believed that the most appropriate policy, in addition to more focused programmes and measures, would be to seek to remedy the problem through economic growth, job creation, the development of the educational system and the improvement of conditions allowing people to move from the informal to the formal sector of the economy.

The Worker members thanked the Government representative for the comprehensive information provided, although they regretted that the Government had not been able to submit this information in its report to the Committee of Experts in time for its session at the end of 2000. This would have facilitated the work of the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee. They did not disagree with the comments of the Government representative that India was a huge country which was poor and still developing, and that a lot of time would be needed to overcome the problems that existed. However, they recalled that India had ratified the Convention in 1954 and had adopted legislation on the abolition of child labour 25 years ago. The plea of poverty could not therefore be used when assessing the manner in which India had complied with its obligations under the Convention. They recalled that the Committee had been examining the case for 15 years and that similar information had been provided almost each year. They had therefore reached the sad conclusion that very little had changed. Although there had been progress in some areas, such as the microfinance project in Andhra Pradesh, as well as in two states, including Kerala, success stories had been few and far between. They nevertheless welcomed the news concerning the ratification of Convention No. 182. In their view, the biggest obstacle to progress was the Government's persistent refusal to recognize the extent of the problem. This persistent refusal made it difficult for the Government to formulate an appropriate response. Indeed, if the Government continued to say that the problem was smaller than it actually was in practice, this would affect the priority given to resolving the issue, as well as the resources allocated. More importantly, state governments would follow the central Government in giving low priority to the issue. The Worker members noted that the Government had persistently rejected all survey findings on the number of bonded labourers in India, including those of the Gandhi Peace Foundation and the National Labour Institute, which had placed the total number of bonded labourers at 2.6 million. They recalled in that respect that the National Labour Institute was a government establishment. Other estimates put the figure much higher, at around 10 million. Instead, the Government claimed that, since the enactment of the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976, some 280,411 bonded labourers had been identified by vigilance committees. When compared with other recent figures, this suggested that only 71 new cases had been discovered during the course of the past year. This seemed quite unbelievable, especially since the report of the Commission on Bonded Labour in Tamil Nadu to the Supreme Court in 1995 had estimated that there were over 1 million bonded labourers in that state alone. Other reports had found a high incidence of bonded labour among the 3 million mine and quarry workers in Rajasthan State, with 95 per cent of those affected being low-caste or indigenous groups. The Worker members also referred to the statement by the Government representative that bonded labour had been reported in 13 states, but as a result of concerted efforts had been eradicated in two states. This would suggest that there were still 11 states where it had not been eradicated. These figures clearly indicated that there was a serious problem of under-reporting and the Worker members therefore supported the call by the Committee of Experts for the compilation of accurate statistics of the number of persons who continued to suffer bonded labour, using a valid statistical methodology. They encouraged the Government to work closely with the ILO for that purpose. A second aspect raised by the Worker members concerned the effectiveness of the measures put in place by the Government to identify and rehabilitate bonded labourers. This responsibility had been delegated to state governments, which were supposed to set up vigilance committees and maintain registers on bonded labour. Despite the Government's assertion that these committees were working satisfactorily, the evidence suggested the contrary. In a presentation to the National Consultation on Forced Labour in September 2000, the former Secretary of Labour to the Government of India had stated that a few state governments had come to the conclusion that there were no bonded labourers in their states even without constituting vigilance committees. Moreover, the vigilance committees that had been set up were not meeting at close and regular intervals. The failure of the vigilance committees was illustrated by the case of Punjab, where Volunteers for Social Justice, an Indian NGO, had indicated that there were 698 cases of bonded labourers on which the authorities had failed to take action. In virtually all of these cases, complaints had been registered with either the Punjab Human Rights Commission or the High Court. It should also be noted that these cases had been uncovered by an NGO, but not by the Punjab vigilance committees. In the past, numerous calls had been made for the Government to improve its coordination and supervision of activities to combat bonded labour. The Worker members urged the Government to take full responsibility for this task and to do much more to ensure the effectiveness of the vigilance committees and other measures. Despite the initiatives taken in the form of field visits and review meetings, the evidence showed that this was not sufficient. Perhaps a multidisciplinary approach was required, involving the central and state governments, district committees, trade unions and NGOs. The Worker members added that the Committee of Experts had requested the Government to provide information on the number of prosecutions, successful convictions and sentences passed against those using bonded labour. Such information was important in showing the effectiveness of the legislation for the eradication of bonded labour. However, once again, no statistics had been provided. It would not appear to be difficult to provide such information, unless of course there had been in practice very few or no prosecutions and convictions. If this was the case, the Committee should be so informed. They therefore called upon the Government to provide the necessary information to demonstrate that the enforcement mechanisms really worked. Turning to the question of child labour, the Worker members fully shared the concern expressed by the Committee of Experts and the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child that large numbers of children were involved in child labour, including bonded labour, especially in the informal sector, household enterprises, domestic service and agriculture, with many of them working under hazardous conditions. They were also concerned that minimum age provisions were rarely enforced and appropriate penalties and sanctions were not imposed to ensure that employers complied with the law. They endorsed the recommendation of the Committee of Experts that the existing legislation, such as the Child Labour Act and the Factories Act, should be amended to ensure better protection for children and prohibit exemptions in areas such as work at home, government schools and training centres and certain factories and workshops. They called for the Government to provide information on the number of employers who had been prosecuted for violations of the Child Labour Act and the Factories Act, and on the penalties imposed. They also urged the Government to indicate a specific time-frame for the adoption of amendments to the legislation. With regard to prostitution and sexual exploitation, they welcomed the fact that the Government representative had provided detailed statistics. The problem of the prostitution and sexual exploitation of children appeared to be serious. They therefore shared the concern of the Committee of Experts that enforcement mechanisms should be strengthened, all complaints properly investigated and all offences punished. They expressed concern that the cases registered under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, had declined. This could not be due to a lack of violations, as the Government had indicated that 100,000 girls were caught in this misery and that the practices of kidnappings, abductions and even forced marriages existed to transfer girls from rural areas to locations where they were in demand. They called upon the Government to provide information on the number of girls who had been freed from such exploitation and rehabilitated. In conclusion, they urged the Government to comply with its obligations under the Convention to suppress the use of forced or compulsory labour in all its forms in the shortest possible time. In so doing, it would be living up to the ideals of a more just and equal society espoused by Mahatma Gandhi.

The Worker member of India expressed the opinion that, while some progress had been achieved in India, the problem was by and large still very serious. It was therefore necessary to pay proper attention to it. He added that there were many problems involved in assessing the real extent of the problem. For example, employers would never readily admit that they employed bonded labourers, and even workers subject to bonded labour might be unwilling to admit their situation. Moreover, there was normally no record of the money that they had borrowed. The problem therefore gave rise to genuine statistical difficulties, despite the development of modern statistical methods. The situation was compounded by the fact that, although the district administrations had been given the responsibility to enforce the legislation, the vigilance committees were not functioning properly. Many of them had not even been reconstituted, and some had stopped working. In addition, many vigilance committees had stopped collecting data. Another issue which arose was the question of the involvement of the social partners in the implementation of the Convention. The Government representative had not commented on this issue. He recalled that there was still no national tripartite committee monitoring the work of the district administrations in resolving the problem. He believed that trade unions would be able to help the Government in this respect and that greater attention should therefore be paid to this solution. With reference to the interpretations of the Supreme Court concerning the concept of forced and bonded labour, he called for a serious attempt to be made to ensure compliance with the minimum wage provisions. However, he noted that these interpretations focused on the issue of work that was paid at rates lower than the subsistence wage, and that they therefore did not cover the whole concept of forced and bonded labour. These interpretations should therefore be seen within the correct context. He emphasized that, following the adoption of the legislation on bonded labour, and particularly over the past ten years as a result of globalization, new forms of bonded labour were emerging. Under pressure from liberalization and the removal of restrictions, traditional and small-scale industries were collapsing. As a result, the workers affected were needing to borrow money to cover their subsistence needs, and therefore risked becoming bonded labourers. He added that the growth in the number of EPZs, in which labour legislation did not apply and which were not covered by ILO Conventions, also ran the risk of promoting new forms of bonded labour. He emphasized that the phenomenon of child labour was still a major problem in his country, and that particular problems arose with the girl child. Unfortunately, insufficient measures had been taken to ensure the full rehabilitation of children released from child labour. An important consideration in this respect was land reform, which had not been implemented in all states. Many workers and children could be freed from bonded labour if they had access to their own land. These problems could therefore be reduced considerably by the pursuance of land reform measures. Turning to the question of prostitution, which was a very serious problem in his country, he noted that most of the measures taken were not within the ambit of the Ministry of Labour. Action would be more effective in this respect if the Ministry of Labour also adopted the relevant measures, since the situation had been aggravated by problems related to employment. Finally, he regretted the fact that, although the relevant legislation existed, there were a very small number of prosecutions, and the resulting number of convictions was also very low. He called upon the Government representative to provide detailed information on this problem, which required serious attention in order to improve enforcement.

The Employer member of India submitted that most of the problem with regard to bonded labour has arisen due to lack of conceptual clarity of the term "bonded labour". There is a confusion arising out of Supreme Court judgement and ILO Convention No. 29. He questioned the validity and authenticity of the surveys conducted by the private bodies and said that government surveys should alone be recognized. In this respect, he observed that the statistics provided by the Government were based on thorough surveys. With reference to the issue of child labour, he indicated that many children accompanying their parents to the fields as no one is available at home to look after them, are termed as child labourers which is a misnomer. He, however, disagreed with the fact that the Factories Act should be amended to cover even household industries, as household industries are an important source of self-employment. He believed that these industries should not be subjected to labour inspection. In conclusion, he emphasized that India was a democratic country with a welfare system, in which the executive legislation and the judiciary are all keen to address the problems of bonded labour and child labour.

The Worker member of Colombia said that the state of poverty, social exclusion and the depth of the social problems faced nowadays by the majority of workers in India was a challenge to everyone. He underlined that it must be concluded, from the report of the Committee of Experts and the Government's statements, that the concerns of the past had not lost their force. He wondered what the fate of the world's workers would be without the ILO. He indicated that when speaking of bonded labour, the figures were very contradictory, some talking of 300,000 others of 2.5 million and some mentioned other figures. The question that must be asked was what were the real numbers. In fact, the numbers were not important, since the reality was self-evident. He expressed the wish that, with the ILO's support, reliable statistics would be available on the number of human beings exposed to such suffering. It was not possible to apply a correct remedy to a disease if its basic nature was not known. The international community should urgently call for the liberation of workers enslaved under the system of bonded labour. He indicated that, when it came to bonded labour of children, domestic labour, agriculture, manufacturing, etc., there would always be a justification on the grounds of poverty and that was heard repeatedly not only in India but in all developing countries. However, one could not remain indifferent to that scourge, nor to prostitution, nor to anything that demeaned the worker. Consequently, he urged the Government of India and all the ruling class to take the necessary corrective measures to prevent such indignity. He also called on the governments of other countries to assist with determination and social commitment to combating the poverty in many countries of the world. However, he said that the aid requested must be merited and that could be achieved by adopting measures to address the problem at its roots. In the case of India, that could begin with the ratification of Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 and the full implementation of Convention No. 29.

The Government representative thanked the Employer and Worker members for their very constructive suggestions and urged them to look upon the problem of bonded labour in his country, which had come before the Committee on numerous occasions, in a very dispassionate and objective manner. He recalled the importance of vigilance to the identity cases of bonded labour and for schemes to rehabilitate bonded labourers. Turning to the issue of statistics of bonded labour, he reaffirmed that the figures provided by the state governments were given on oath to the Supreme Court. He wondered whether the NGOs which offered different figures would be prepared to make such a commitment to the Supreme Court, particularly in view of their liability if the statistics were wrong. Moreover, India was a free country and official statistics could be challenged if necessary. He feared that many of the figures put forward concerning bonded labour in India were no more than fantasy. He therefore called upon the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee to respect the figures provided by the Government. He recalled that bonded labour was a dynamic problem. The situation changed rapidly. However, when cases of bonded labour were identified, the framework existed for action to be taken. Moreover, he refuted accusations that the vigilance committees were not working well. Although a certain number of shortcomings were always possible in such a large country, he recalled that the whole process was overseen by the National Human Rights Commission under the instructions of the Supreme Court. Moreover, in view of the political structure of India, there was no option but to involve state governments. He added that the composition of the vigilance committees was laid down by law and included a wide variety of members representing both official bodies and the population at large. He welcomed the views expressed by the Employer members and their understanding of the fact that it was necessary to tackle the root causes underlying the problem, with particular reference to the creation of employment and the improvement of the educational system. This was precisely the approach that the Government was adopting in endeavouring to address these very serious problems. He also noted the comments made concerning the number of prosecutions and convictions under the legislation respecting bonded labour. He undertook to obtain the necessary figures. However, he added that with a problem as complex as bonded labour, the imposition of sanctions and the creation of further social tension was not necessarily the best approach. There was a need for a stable social situation to exist at the grassroots level in order to address the problem adequately. In that respect, he welcomed the reference to the high ideals of Mahatma Gandhi and assured the Committee that his Government attached the greatest importance to improving the situation of the needy and the deprived and of those who were subject to discrimination. It was necessary to give such persons the confidence to participate in the mainstream of society. With regard to the lack of conceptual clarity concerning the issue of forced and bonded labour, particularly in view of the interpretations of the Supreme Court, he urged the Committee to confine itself to the provisions of the Convention when examining the situation in his country. He also called on other members of the Committee who had referred to information that was not in the possession of the Government to provide it with the relevant data. He welcomed the suggestion made by the Worker member of India that trade unions should be more involved in the action taken to eradicate bonded labour. However, he refuted his suggestion that labour legislation was not applied in EPZs. Referring to his comment that new forms of bonded labour were emerging, he called for studies to be undertaken to assess them. Moreover, he welcomed the statement of the Worker member of Colombia that powerful governments needed to provide other countries with assistance with a view to combating poverty. Turning to the issue of child labour, he expressed the belief that observations of the Committee that home-based work done by children be prohibited, went well beyond the provisions of Convention No. 182. He warned that in the gigantic task of combating child labour, the first objective needed to be to focus on those children who were engaged in hazardous work. Another priority was to ensure that such children were linked to school, so that they could find their freedom from child labour through education. The eradication of child labour would have to be a step-by-step process, concentrating in the first place on the most hazardous forms of work. Nevertheless, he looked forward to creating the framework for the ratification and implementation of Convention No. 182.

The Employer members emphasized that the situation was very serious. The argument was not only about statistics, since it was clear that the problem was immense, even using the Government's figures. As all the information would be provided to the Office by the end of July, they hoped that the Committee of Experts would be able to provide a clear description of the elements of the case so that the Conference Committee would in future be in a better situation to deal more concretely with the problems of bonded labour, child labour and prostitution and sexual exploitation in the country. It was sincerely to be hoped that the members of the Committee would in their lifetime be able to see that India had embarked on the path to eliminating forced labour.

The Worker members thanked the Government representative for the additional information provided and expressed their agreement with the view that bonded labour, child labour, prostitution and sexual exploitation were all extremely complex issues which could not only be addressed by specific schemes, but also required measures in such fields as education, health care and social development. They reminded the Government representative that, if help were required, the ILO could provide technical assistance and the IPEC programme could offer more practical solutions to overcoming some of the difficulties involved. They added that serious consideration should also be given to the involvement of trade unions which, particularly as representatives of grassroots organizations, could make an important contribution. The Worker members also emphasized that accurate statistics were not only a matter of intellectual curiosity, but were an essential means of ascertaining the true extent of the problem, so that the issue could be viewed with the necessary clarity. With regard to the references made to the interpretation of the concept of forced and bonded labour by the Supreme Court in relation to the provisions of Convention No. 29, they recalled that there was a very strong body of jurisprudence in the ILO concerning bonded labour which could help to clarify the situation. They therefore recommended that the Government should enter into dialogue with the Office on this matter. Clarification of the conceptual issues would be important in influencing the surveys to be carried out and in ensuring that statistical surveys had a viable conceptual basis. Turning to the issue of child labour, particularly when carried out in the home, the Worker members recalled that, when India ratified Convention No. 182, it would need to devote attention to the issue of inspection, which was not place bound and would cover all locations where children worked as recommended by the Meeting of Experts on Labour Inspection on Child Labour in September 1999. They emphasized that the work carried out by children at home should also be covered by labour legislation. Finally, they hoped that the Government would be willing to accept the assistance and projects offered by the ILO in relation to these problems.

The Government representative wished to clarify that he had not in any way wished to give the impression that the interpretations by the Supreme Court of the concept of forced labour, although very broad, were incorrect or that he did not agree with them. He had merely wished to say that they went beyond the definition of forced labour set out in the Convention.

The Worker members emphasized that it had not been their intention to suggest that the Government representative did not accept the interpretations of forced labour by the Supreme Court of India. They had merely indicated that the Government representative felt that the interpretations were too wide and resulted in a lack of conceptual clarity in relation to Convention No. 29.

The Government representative regretted that the comments he had made during the discussion had not been taken into account in the Committee's conclusions. He felt that it seemed that the Committee had finalized their conclusions even before he had put across the Government of India's view.

The Committee noted the detailed information supplied by the Government representative and the subsequent discussion. The Committee noted with regret that 25 years after the adoption of the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976, little progress had been made in identifying, freeing and rehabilitating bonded workers, despite repeated observations by the Committee of Experts and numerous discussions of the case in the present Committee. The Committee, like the Committee of Experts, deplored the fact that the Government had not submitted in time the report that should have been examined at its last session. The Committee urged the Government once again to undertake a statistical survey on bonded labour throughout the country, using a valid methodology in cooperation with workers' and employers' organizations and with human rights' organizations and institutions. The Committee noted the Government's efforts to eradicate child labour in collaboration with the Office but observed that the situation of children in bondage and other forms of compulsory labour had not sufficiently improved. The Committee expressed the firm hope that the Government would continue to endeavour to systematically apply the laws on child labour and eradicate exploitations of children, particularly in the informal sector and dangerous activities. With respect to the prostitution and sexual exploitation of children, the Committee urged the Government to continue to supply full and detailed information on that question, including reliable statistics, as well as information on measures taken to free and rehabilitate sexually exploited children. The Committee once again expressed the firm hope that the necessary measures would be taken at national, state and local level with a view to achieving concrete and significant progress in the application, in law and in practice, of this fundamental Convention in the near future.

The Government representative regretted that the comments he had made during the discussion had not been taken into account in the Committee's conclusions. He felt that it seemed that the Committee had finalized their conclusions even before he had put across the Government of India's view.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2000, Publication: 88th ILC session (2000)

A Government representative noted the comments of the Committee of Experts and recalled that the Government had submitted two reports to the Committee, one of which responded to the matters raised by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). He wished to address the three major issues raised by the report: bonded labour, child labour, and prostitution and sexual exploitation.

With regard to bonded labour, he recalled the historical background of India's efforts to combat this problem. He noted that the Karachi Congress in 1931 had addressed the issue of the abolition of serfdom, long before India had ratified Convention No. 29. Furthermore, article 22 of the Indian Constitution of 1949 prohibited bonded labour, and in 1954 India had ratified Convention No. 29. Twenty-two years later, the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 and the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Ordinance 1975 were passed, as were a number of local ordinances and regulations prohibiting bonded labour. The fight against bonded labour had been a prime objective of past governments, and figured prominently in the Twenty Point Programme for the Nation under the Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

It was of paramount importance to arrive at a precise definition of bonded labour. He noted that bonded labour was characterized by an unequal exchange system, where one person rendered his services or the services of any of his family members under compulsion to another in order to pay off a debt, and as a consequence was denied freedom of movement, choice of employment, and minimum wage. He also stressed that it was difficult to identify bonded labourers and to collect reliable statistics on them. Section 13 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act provided for the establishment of vigilance committees at district and subdivisional levels to maintain close surveillance on the occurrence of bonded labour in the area. However, section 13 did not prescribe the procedure for these vigilance committees to identify bonded labourers. Drawing on his personal experiences as a socio-legal investigator of the Supreme Court on bonded labour matters, the speaker observed that the orthodox approach of asking persons whether they were bonded labourers would normally not elicit a reliable response, since many such persons were too intimidated or ignorant of their rights under the law to have confidence in the investigator. Only through a non-traditional and non-confrontational approach could investigators win the trust of bonded labourers and hear their stories. The establishment of reliable statistics depended on the orientation and training of local magistrates and members of the vigilance committees to adopt such an approach when investigating bonded labour. The establishment of reliable statistics was also complicated by the numerous languages and dialects used in India and the frequent migration which characterized the informal sector.

Once bonded labourers had been identified, the next step was their release, which also presented certain difficulties. He pointed to a recent Supreme Court decision which ruled that it was not sufficient to prove a creditor-debtor relationship in order to prevent a relationship of labour without remuneration being considered as bonded labour. The ruling assumed that where a labourer supplied his labour free, he or she was obliged to do so, due to an advanced loan or some other exploitative economic arrangement. This judgement had been communicated to the districts and subdivisions and was hoped to facilitate the release of bonded labourers.

It was also essential to understand that the problem of bonded labour was inextricably tied to the greater socio-economic problems of unemployment, landlessness, poverty, and migration. He stated that despite the enormous political will of the current government, it had not succeeded in eradicating poverty. Therefore, the full eradication of bonded labour would only be possible through a holistic and parallel approach to dealing with the nation's economy.

Rehabilitation was the next important step after a bonded labourer had been identified and released. The speaker recalled that the Bonded Labour Rehabilitation Scheme of 1978 provided for assistance and funding for rehabilitation measures, which included the allotment of land, the development of land already owned, credit, subsidized housing, health services, skill training and the support of women and children. He recalled that up to March 1999, over 200,000 bonded labourers had been released and rehabilitated, and that 17,000 were in the process of being rehabilitated. Despite such progress, further funding and research was needed.

Concluding his statements on the issue of bonded labour, the speaker indicated that a full-fledged division in the Ministry of Labour was devoted to bonded labour, and that screening committees had been established which would assure that funds released for programmes for the eradication of bonded labour were efficiently used. The Ministry of Labour also ensured that any complaints received regarding bonded labour were communicated to the district magistrate, with strict deadlines for a response, and follow-up procedures to monitor complaints. In this regard, he stressed that the federal Government's role was to coordinate a national policy on bonded labour, but that it was ultimately the State's responsibility to ensure that such policies were implemented. Finally, only close collaboration with NGOs would assure the full outreach of such programmes.

Turning to the problem of child labour, the Government representative emphasized the national Government was totally committed to the elimination of child labour. He recalled that the Children (Pledging of Labour) Act, 1933 prohibited parents from mortgaging the services of their children, and that the Employment of Children Act, 1938 restricted child labour in a number of areas. Furthermore, pursuant to India's ratification of six of the ILO Conventions on child labour, the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 prohibited the employment of children under the age of 14 in hazardous industries. Parts A and B of this Act prohibited child labour in 64 industries considered as hazardous, and the Child Labour Technical Advisory Committee established under section 5 of the Act had recommended another nine industries as hazardous. As with bonded labour, it was difficult to establish reliable statistics on child labour. In this respect, he pointed out that the Supreme Court judgement of 10 December 1996 in Writ of Petition 465 of 1986 provided for countrywide surveys of child labour on the district level and reiterated the principle of free and compulsory education for children under the age of 14. This judgement had been communicated to officials at the local level and funds had been placed at the disposal of all 535 districts for conducting the survey, which had been completed and the report of which had been submitted to the Supreme Court on 31 May 1997.

He recalled that 93 national child labour projects had been made operational with the purpose of identifying, releasing, and rehabilitating child labourers. In the context of these programmes, 3,000 special schools had been established and 3,000 teachers had been appointed to provide education, skill training, health care, and other rehabilitation services to released child workers. Moreover, India subscribed to the principle that education for children between the ages of 5 and 14 was a fundamental human right. He regretted that the proposed 83rd Constitutional Amendment, which sought to make education a fundamental right and which provided for compulsory and universal primary education, had not been carried to its logical conclusion due to a number of reasons, but hoped that similar efforts would succeed in the future.

As with bonded labour, he observed that child labour was closely linked to lack of education, landlessness, assetlessness and poverty. The process of economic development caused significant social upheaval, and as a result, the very participants in development could become victims of the development process. He lamented the fact that there were not enough schools and teachers to provide free, compulsory and universal primary education to the over 600,000 villages in India. Nonetheless, he stressed that the Government was making a planned, coordinated, and concentrated effort, with the assistance of all branches of the Government, to root out child labour and to provide for educational opportunities for all children. He announced that the first priority of the Government was to release children employed in hazardous work, and the second priority was to assist children employed in non-hazardous work. Another issue of great importance was the release and rehabilitation of children employed in prostitution, pornography, and in illegal drug trafficking. He acknowledged that child labour remained a big problem in India, but was confident that government efforts would make progress in finding a solution to the problem. In closing, he pointed to the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between India and IPEC in 1992, which was renewed on 17 February this year. With the assistance of IPEC and the participation of workers, employers, and NGOs, a number of programmes had been established to fight child labour, and he hoped continued close cooperation with IPEC would bear further results in the future.

Another Government representative noted the Committee of Experts' concerns relating to children being used for prostitution purposes. The rules and regulations in place in India were very strict in addressing this issue and defined sex with girls as rape, whether or not the girl had consented. He therefore stressed that the national legislation was fully in conformity with both Conventions Nos. 29 and 182. However, India was a developing country of 1 billion people with problems of poverty and unemployment, and, therefore, circumstances in the country might result in the exploitation of children despite the legal measures in place. Accordingly, it was necessary to strengthen the enforcement mechanisms so that all complaints would be properly investigated and all offences punished.

Noting the lack of accurate statistics on the number of prostitutes in India, he cited a survey conducted by the Central Social Welfare Board in six selected cities, which found that there were 70,000 to 100,000 prostitutes in India and that 30 per cent of this number was under the age of 20 years. He noted that 4.77 per cent of this population were from neighbouring countries. Poverty was the main factor which led to prostitution. The illiteracy rate among this population was 71 per cent. Families of prostitutes were primarily unemployed or were in unskilled employment.

With regard to the legal framework established to eradicate this problem, he noted that article 23 of the Indian Constitution prohibited trafficking in human beings. Moreover, India had ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child as well as the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. It had also enacted the Immoral Trafficking Prevention Act, which provided that sex with children would be treated as rape and persons accused of this criminal offence would be tried in the criminal courts. The Act contemplated the rescue and rehabilitation of the victims of this crime. The Indian Penal Code also contained provisions regarding the abduction of children, rape and other related offences. He noted that, in response to this problem, the Government had involved all NGOs in the country in efforts to identify and resolve abuses, due to the magnitude of the problem and the Government's limited resources. The Government also focused on a two-pronged strategy whose objectives were to improve the economic resources of the families where prostitutes were found and to conduct an awareness-raising campaign to alert the public to this problem. The Government's main focus in this regard was on prevention. In closing, he noted that the provincial government of Uttar Pradesh had commissioned a study on child prostitution and he assured the Committee that the study would be made available to the ILO once it was completed.

The Worker members thanked the Government representatives for the extensive additional information supplied to the Committee and requested that all of this information be submitted to the Committee of Experts in writing so that it could be examined. At present they concluded that there had been little progress made in the case. While there appeared to be some attempts to develop a policy and coordinated strategy involving central and state governments, more needed to be done. Some legislation required further review and enforcement mechanisms were weak. The problem of engaging NGOs remained, since these organizations reported that authorities were unhappy with their presence and at times antagonistic towards them. The Worker members felt that the Government was still minimizing the problem of forced labour in India by insisting, even in the face of overwhelming evidence, that the numbers of such workers were small. This refusal to accept that there was a problem of grave magnitude would impede efforts to find a speedier solution to the problem.

The Worker members noted that the case before the Committee was a very old one. India had ratified the Convention in 1954 and the Committee of Experts had been commenting on this case since 1966. It had been discussed in the Committee over the past 14 years and had been mentioned in a special paragraph in 1994. India's Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act had been in existence for 24 years. Despite the requirements under Article 1(1) of the Convention that ratifying countries undertake to eradicate forced or compulsory labour in all its forms "within the shortest possible period", little progress had been achieved in this area. While acknowledging India's difficult circumstances, which included a large population and poverty, the Worker members nevertheless stated that surely some progress should have been made in half a century.

In its observation, the Committee of Experts identified three areas of forced labour: bonded labour, child forced labour and prostitution and sexual exploitation of women and young girls. One persistent problem noted by both the Committee of Experts and this Committee was the lack of reliable statistics on the number of bonded labourers in India. The figures cited by the Government representative were inconsistent with those found in its own survey, conducted by the Gandhi Peace Foundation and the National Labour Institute in 1978-79, which cited a figure of 2.6 million. Another survey commissioned by the Indian Supreme Court in 1994 found that there were 1 million bonded labourers in the state of Tamil Nadu alone. Other sources identified 5 to 10 million such labourers.

The Worker members strongly supported the Committee of Experts' request that the Government undertake a comprehensive survey using valid statistical methodology, since accurate data was essential to develop and assess effective systems to combat the problem. The Worker members urged the Government to carry out this survey immediately and stated that, if technical assistance was necessary to conduct the survey, the ILO could certainly provide it. The Worker members stressed the need to determine the extent of the problem in order to allocate the resources necessary to eradicate it. Further, an effective system of inspection was needed and the Government was encouraged to work with the social partners and other organizations to strengthen its work.

Referring to the Committee of Experts' comments regarding bonded labourers rehabilitated under the centrally sponsored scheme in Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Orissa, the Worker members believed that the number rehabilitated (5,960) was too low in light of the total number of bonded labourers in India, and asserted that more should be done. With regard to the comments on subsidies and other benefits proposed for bonded labourers, the Worker members asked the Government to provide details on the number of rehabilitated bonded labourers who had benefited from these benefits and how much had been set aside for this purpose.

The Worker members referred to the Committee of Experts' comments that state governments had been asked to form vigilance committees, as required under section 13 of the Bonded Labour Act, to enable them to maintain close and constant supervision over the problem. They asked the Government to supply detailed information on those states that had set up such committees, including on how the committees are staffed and their manner of operation, on the number of complaints received, the time period for resolution of complaints and public awareness-raising measures taken. Vigilance committees could constitute an important tool to combat forced labour at the grass-roots level. However, despite the Government representative's statements, the committees did not appear to be working well. As an example, Anti-Slavery International, an NGO, had reported an incident in the state of Punjab, where authorities had failed to intervene to enforce the law in relation to complaints filed with the District Magistrate on behalf of 11 women bonded labourers. This case and others had been taken up by the NGO, but to date it appeared the women had not been freed nor had the landlords been punished. It was clear that the enforcement mechanisms in India must be strengthened and there must be guidelines to ensure that the Supreme Court's ruling was applied.

In respect of child bonded labour, the government statistics did not indicate what percentage of bonded labourers were children, although information from NGOs noted that many children were working as bonded labourers, often to pay off their parents' debt, despite national legislation preventing parents from engaging in the practice of pledging their children. Further, referring to the Committee of Experts' comments on the lack of inspections of small production units under the Factories Act, the Worker members considered the exclusion of such units from coverage under the Act to constitute a violation of the Convention. They urged the Government to amend the law to protect bonded labourers employed in such units. Noting that article 24 of the Indian Constitution prohibited the employment of children under 14 in any factory, mine, or other hazardous employment, the Worker members asked the Government to provide information on the number of employers who had been prosecuted for employing children in violation of this article.

Referring to the Committee of Experts' comments on the serious problem of child prostitution and sexual exploitation of women and girls, the Worker members noted the lack of reliable statistics on the number of prostitutes, including child Devadasis and Joginis. Although the Worker members were disappointed that the Central Advisory Committee was only now thinking of framing recommendations and a plan of action for the rescue and rehabilitation of child prostitutes, this was still a positive effort. The Worker members urged the Government to supply full information to the Committee on such measures, particularly on the steps being taken and the resources being allocated to educate child labourers and child prostitutes as part of the rehabilitation process.

Given the Government representative's references to legislation prohibiting child prostitution, the Worker members requested the Government to supply information on the number of persons that had been prosecuted under this legislation. They agreed with the Government that bonded labour was an outrage to humanity, but considered that the Government had not accorded sufficient priority to the matter and had not moved quickly enough to resolve the problem.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for the extensive information provided to the Committee which had placed the comments of the Committee of Experts into context. They requested the Committee of Experts to provide a more structured picture of the cultural and legal situation in India in future reports to expedite the discussion of the Committee in this regard. The Committee's most recent discussion in this case had involved the same issues that had been discussed previously: bonded labour, child labour, and prostitution and sexual exploitation of women and girls. The problems were deemed to be of such magnitude that this Committee placed its concerns in a special paragraph in 1994.

The Employer members referred to the Committee of Experts' observation that the vigilance committees were not working well. Noting the Government representative's statement that a certain urgency and priority was being given to this problem, the Employer members requested information on the number of federal and state civil servants working on a day-to-day basis, particularly in the field, attempting to identify and eradicate practices of bonded labour. With regard to the lack of reliable statistics, the Government representative had confirmed the difficulties involved in speaking with the parties concerned. However, the Employer members agreed with the Worker members that it was necessary to ascertain the number of people affected in order to have a basis for evaluating the situation and therefore requested the Government to supply the results of the survey conducted in this regard.

Commenting on the increase in bonded labour, the Employer members considered the rehabilitation projects initiated by the Government to have had limited success. They asked the Government to supply information on the amount of money allocated to these projects, an assessment of its sufficiency and on any measures taken to ensure that rehabilitated bonded labourers were not forced back into bondage.

As to the information requested in paragraph 7 of the Committee of Experts' report, it was not enough merely for the Government to supply the data requested. Noting that the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act had been in place for over 24 years, it was time for the Government to determine what worked, and what did not work, and to make the necessary changes. This evaluation should include the question of the effectiveness of vigilance committees as well as the new information given by the Government representative on such committees.

The Employer members noted that, despite the measures taken by the Government, child labour remained a substantial problem. They requested the Government to indicate the manner in which it was applying the 1996 Supreme Court decision requiring children to be removed from employment in hazardous industries. The Employer members also asked the Government to supply in full the information requested by the Committee in paragraph 12 of its observation.

With regard to the issue of child prostitution, the Employer members recalled the 1998 discussion before this Committee on the existence of child welfare programmes for the protection and rehabilitation of children. There again, the Government needed to evaluate what was working and what was not and adjust its strategy accordingly. While the Committee recognized the difficult economic and social circumstances in the country, they considered that the Government should nevertheless place a greater priority on resolving the problem of forced labour.

The Worker member of India noted that, despite India's ratification of the Convention 46 years ago and its enactment of relevant legislation almost 25 years ago, the serious problem of forced labour remained. Reliable statistics on the number of bonded labourers were not available, primarily because of the clandestine nature of this type of employment. Employers would not admit to having bonded labourers for fear of penal action, while workers would not complain of the situation for fear of losing their livelihood. With regard to the Government's statement on the number of bonded labourers released and rehabilitated between 1976 and 1999, the Government representative had not clarified the nature of the rehabilitation provided, nor had information been supplied regarding the number of bonded labourers that might have been forced back into bonded labour, including migrating labourers. The Government should undertake to obtain accurate data on this question. A large portion of bonded labourers in India were in rural areas and rural landlords and moneylenders systematically exploited the rural poor, who were forced to borrow money at exorbitant rates of interest. Since these people were landless, they were forced to pledge their children to work. The high interest rates charged made these loans impossible to pay off. The implementation of structural adjustment programmes required by the IMF and the World Bank had increased poverty in the area and, as a result, the bonded labour system continued in rural India, particularly in the absence of genuine land reform and the Government's failure to take steps to stop this exploitation.

He noted that India's vast population was increasing annually. The rehabilitation statistics supplied by the Government representative did not take into account new bonded labourers and new child labourers and he noted that this phenomenon continued to increase with the rise in population. Moreover, the number of persons living below the poverty line (52 per cent according to World Bank estimates) had increased in India over the last decade. Under these circumstances, he considered that official measures taken by the Government did not even begin to address the problem and, in fact, he believed that the Government's policies only added to poverty in rural areas.

The question of bonded labour was closely linked with child labour. India employed the largest number of child labourers in the world. Although the Government had enacted the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 which prohibited child labour in certain industries, the number of children working in those industries had increased over the past 14 years. Children still worked in agriculture, construction, mines, fisheries, matchbox factories, glass factories, the bidi industry and other sectors. They worked eight to ten hours per day in unhygienic conditions. Despite rehabilitation measures taken by the Government, the number of working children in India was increasing every year. While the ILO might continue to request more information, appreciate information supplied by the Government and request additional details, the problem would not be resolved, as it was closely linked with the need to develop the economy, generate gainful employment, provide proper housing and increase the minimum wage to enable parents to maintain and educate their children. Indeed, with 130 million unemployed out of an economically active population of 340 million, it was likely that the problems in India would continue to worsen.

As the Committee of Experts had noted, pursuant to the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, the Supreme Court of India had directed employers guilty of using child labour to pay an amount of 20,000 rupees per child in compensation, which sum would be deposited in a special rehabilitation fund. However, the Government had not provided information on any amounts recovered from offending employers to date. Moreover, with regard to the Committee of Experts' comments on the lack of labour inspections in small production units under the Factories Act, 1948, he indicated that child labour and bonded labour existed in large numbers in such units.

In respect of the projects initiated by the Government, he noted that the trade unions had asked the Government to permit the social partners to monitor the progress of these programmes, but that the Government had declined. He indicated his belief that the Government's political will to resolve this problem was absent today. He stressed that there were laws and regulations prohibiting forced labour in India, but what was important was actual practice. Referring to the upcoming global report, he hoped that the Government would prepare a plan of action in cooperation with the social partners in the context of the global report for next year.

The Employer member of India considered that the detailed information supplied by the Government representative had responded in large part to the Committee of Experts' observation. Commenting on the issue of the disparities in the statistics on bonded labour he relied on the statistics given by the Government representative which indicated that 280,340 bonded labourers had been identified and that only 17,000 remained to be rehabilitated. He characterized these as positive statistics. Recalling that India had been the first country to join IPEC in 1992, he asserted that child labour and bonded labour no longer existed in the formal sector. If it did persist, this problem would be found only in the informal sector. In respect of the problem of child labour, he referred to the Government representative's statements regarding programmes initiated in this area and maintained that the Government had actively involved the social partners in these activities. The speaker questioned the authority of the Committee to examine complaints in respect of child labour brought by NGOs, commenting that, in India's case, the complaint had been initiated by only one NGO -- Anti-Slavery International -- and not by the social partners. The Committee of Experts should not take cognizance of a complaint filed by an NGO in the same manner as a complaint from the social partners, because NGOs had no reciprocal obligations and commitments. Since NGOs were outside the framework of tripartism, they should not have any right to put a sovereign country in the dock.

The Worker member of Japan appreciated the measures taken by the Government to eradicate forced labour in the context of bonded labour, child labour in hazardous conditions and child labour in sex industries. However in his view, this was only the first step in the process. He referred to Articles 23, 24 and 25 of the Convention, which required the Government to issue complete and precise regulations governing the use of forced labour; to take adequate measures to ensure that these regulations were strictly applied; and to provide for the illegal exaction of forced labour to be punishable as a penal offence. He trusted that the Government would continue in its efforts to eradicate forced labour in accordance with these provisions, and therefore requested the Committee to ask the Government to provide additional information on measures taken in this regard. While he acknowledged the Government representative's statement that poverty was a major cause of forced labour, he felt that this problem would not be automatically abolished when economic and social development was achieved. Therefore, a firm commitment to the core labour standards remained necessary. He noted that India had ratified the Convention almost 50 years ago, but that many children remained working in hazardous conditions, including many children in small-scale units or sex industries, as described in the Committee of Experts' observation. Pointing out that ratifying governments should suppress the use of forced labour within the shortest possible time, he expressed his trust in India's strong and sincere commitment to the abolition of forced child labour.

The Worker member of Pakistan recalled that his own country was a neighbour of India and faced many of the same problems. He emphasized that children constituted the future of the country and were essential for its prosperity and social and economic development. It was the responsibility of humankind as a whole to ensure that they enjoyed conditions which were conducive to their future development. However, in developing countries children were born unequal and, in the absence of social security safety nets, destitute families might be forced to send their children out to work. Governments therefore needed to comply with their national and international commitments and ensure that a better future was offered to the many millions of suffering children. He noted that under the terms of the Factories Act, 1948, many small enterprises were not subject to inspection. However, these were precisely the enterprises in which child labour was common. Effective action to combat the problem would require the real involvement of the social partners in all the relevant programmes. In this respect, he pointed out that the policies promoted by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank did not promote increased prosperity and, indeed, gave rise to more widespread poverty, particularly in view of the downsizing of enterprises. He encouraged the Government of India to examine closely the reasons which made the poor send their children out to work. The State also needed to direct more resources towards education and to build up social security systems to help poor families. While welcoming the fact that Convention No. 182 was being considered for ratification and that IPEC projects were being implemented with the involvement of the social partners, he called upon the Government to review the Factories Act, 1948, with a view to ensuring that the labour inspection system was made more effective. He fully supported the concerns raised by the Committee of Experts that the Government was not in compliance with all the provisions of the Convention. It therefore needed to allocate greater resources to overcoming the problems which had been raised as a contribution to the future development of society.

The Government representative stated that he had listened with great attention to all the points raised during the debate. He would endeavour to respond to a number of them immediately, while submitting more detailed information in writing to the Committee of Experts. He recalled that for effective progress to be made in any field of social action it was necessary for there to be clear guidance in the Constitution, clear legal provisions and the political will to pursue the necessary objectives. It was then necessary for the administration to show integrity and transparency in the implementation of programmes to ensure that they benefited the target groups. In his country, articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution gave a clear mandate to eradicate bonded and child labour. This was reflected in the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, and the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986. The political will to address these problems was manifested in the programmes of political parties and in the economic measures taken once they came to power. It was also reflected in the plethora of social programmes designed to eradicate poverty, unemployment and underemployment. However, progress was made difficult by the resilience of the inequitable social order, which was a relic of his country's colonial past. It was therefore necessary to examine the reasons why, despite favourable legislation and the political will, such aberrations persisted. In this respect, he recalled the information provided in his earlier statement. One of the reasons why greater progress had not been made in combating bonded labour was that the correct methods of gaining an understanding of the problem had not been adopted. He was fortunate in that he had been mandated by the Supreme Court to look into the problem and, based on a very large number of interviews with bonded labourers, his conclusions had been published under the title Born in Bondage. What was required was a consistent effort to disseminate information on the provisions of the law and to carry out training programmes at all levels, particularly for local vigilance committees, which should be given sufficient resources.

He denied that his Government tended to minimize the problem of forced labour. However, he recalled that once the leadership had been given at the federal level, it was then necessary to ensure that action was taken in practice at the levels of the states and territories. It was also necessary to ensure that, when programmes were carried out, their impact was reviewed and corrective action was taken with a view to improving them. In view of the magnitude of the problem and its dependency on the issues of poverty and landlessness, it had not been possible to take effective action against bonded labour at an early stage. He emphasized in this respect that even those workers who were engaged in bonded labour had little idea of how to free themselves from their predicament. Indeed, those who had been freed from bonded labour as a result of government programmes might even relapse into bondage once again. While it was difficult to gain an accurate picture of the numbers of lapsed bonded labourers, he said that an effort would be made to find out.

Finally, he informed the Committee that both Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 were under examination with a view to their ratification. The ratification procedure for Convention No. 182 was nearing completion. With regard to Convention No. 138, he noted that there was no legislation on the minimum age for admission to employment throughout the country. Efforts were now being made to develop such legislation establishing a minimum age of 14 years for admission to employment, and 18 years for arduous work, which would be applicable in the entire country. He hoped that Convention No. 138 would be ratified once satisfactory compliance had been achieved through the proposed legislation.

Another Employer member of India stated that the difficulties experienced in eliminating child and bonded labour were not the result of a lack of political will. Nevertheless, it might be beneficial for the Committee to keep up and even increase the pressure on the Government to take effective action. Even so, it should not be thought that the problems could be eliminated overnight by edict or statute, which would merely tend to make them go underground. He encouraged the Committee to show patience and to give the Government and the social partners in India a chance to address the problem effectively.

The Worker members thanked the Government representative for the information provided. They noted that they had raised a number of questions with a view to helping the Government address the issues raised by the Committee of Experts more effectively. They welcomed the news that the ratification of Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 was under consideration. They continued to urge the Government to take the necessary measures to eradicate the problem of child forced labour and called for more international support, including funding from international agencies. With regard to the issue of the disputed figures concerning bonded labour, they noted that different methods had been used by the Government and the other organizations responsible for carrying out surveys. They therefore agreed with the comments made by the Committee of Experts concerning the vital importance of accurate data and urged the Government to undertake the necessary surveys based on agreed statistical methodologies. They emphasized that the statistics produced were not mere numbers, but concerned human beings, and that it was essential to know how many were involved before effective action could be taken. Finally, with respect to the concerns addressed by the Committee of Experts, they recalled that the Government had ratified the Convention and was required to meet the obligations deriving from it.

The Employer members acknowledged that the Government had devoted a lot of time and resources to addressing the problems of bonded and child labour. They urged it not to adopt a defensive attitude with regard to the appeal that had been made to evaluate the effectiveness of the action which had been taken. This should be regarded as an opportunity to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the means adopted to combat the problems.

The Committee took note of the extensive information supplied by the Government representative and of the discussion which ensued. It noted with regret that 20 years after the adoption of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, bonded labour still existed in the country. This case had been discussed in this Committee eight times over the past 15 years, but insufficient progress towards full compliance with the provisions of the Convention had been achieved. While noting the Government's initiatives to eradicate bonded labour throughout the country, and the difficulty of assembling fully reliable data, the Committee expressed concern about the disparity of statistics over the years and urged the Government to undertake a comprehensive and authoritative survey. The Committee noted the Government's commitment to eliminate child labour, in particular forced child labour, but noted that many children continued to live in bondage and other forms of compulsory child labour. It urged the Government to step up its activities. It called upon the Government to provide legal protection, in particular to children working in the unorganized sectors, i.e. in small-scale units not covered by the Factories Act, 1948. As regards prostitution and sexual exploitation of children, the Committee noted the existence of legislation on the subject, but urged the Government to continue to take practical action to eliminate it, including the development of reliable statistics in this regard. The Committee expressed the firm hope that the next government report to the Committee of Experts would describe in detail the action taken in cooperation with non-governmental organizations, and at national, state and local levels, as well as the progress achieved and the number of prosecutions for violations of existing laws, so that full application of the Convention, in law and in practice, could be noted in the near future. The Committee urged the Government in particular to provide an assessment of the effectiveness of the various measures put into place to combat forced and compulsory labour.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1998, Publication: 86th ILC session (1998)

A Government representative referred first to the identification of bonded labourers. The Committee of Experts questioned whether a comprehensive survey had been carried out observing that in the absence of such a survey there remained different estimates of their numbers. Noting that identification of bonded labourers had been disputed for a long time, the Government representative confirmed that the survey proposed by the National Sample Survey Organization had not been scheduled before 1998-99. Underemployment, poverty, illiteracy and the imbalance between the supply of and the demand for labour put this question in a different dimension. A survey revealing the position at any given moment could reveal another situation in the next moment, giving rise to conflicting claims and the impression that figures were inaccurate. For example, during the period between surveys, cases may surface because new labourers had gone into bondage. Thus, the impression could easily be given that any survey, no matter how comprehensive, had limitations in this socio-economic context. What was important was a continuous review of the problem and effective steps to address it. In India, those at the highest levels were alert to the problem of bonded labour. Earlier, 251,000 bonded labourers had been identified, of whom approximately 231,000 had been rehabilitated. The remainder had not been available for rehabilitation because they had died or migrated. Other important steps taken towards identification and elimination of the practice of bonded labour in recent years included the following: in August 1996 the Union Labour Minister wrote to the state-level Chief Ministers of 12 bonded labour-prone states giving detailed guidelines for the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers; in October 1996 the Union Labour Minister held a high-level meeting with state government representatives; and in May 1997 the Union Labour Secretary chaired a meeting to review the problem. The proceedings of meetings, since issued, contained detailed guidelines and directives about a survey for identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. The Supreme Court, in a decision dated 19 November 1996, directed all state governments to comply with the directives of the Central Government regarding the survey of bonded labourers by 31 December 1996. On this basis, the states had reported identification of an additional 29,000 bonded labourers. The Supreme Court, in its final order dated 10 November 1997, requested the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to take up responsibility for the monitoring and implementation of its directive on bonded labourers. These events showed that the Central Government, state governments and the Supreme Court were all actively involved and conscious of the problem of bonded labour and serious steps were being taken to identify and rehabilitate bonded labourers. The statistics provided here on the numbers of bonded labourers were those given by the states in their affidavits before the Supreme Court, which the Court had accepted. The Government had no reason to doubt the veracity of these statistics.

He recalled that this Committee had been informed in 1993 that a committee of state labour secretaries had been constituted to recommend a workable definition of bonded labour and modalities and procedures for their rehabilitation. The report of that committee (known as the "Chakrevarty Committee") had been examined in detail by the Ministry of Labour and it had been felt that the report was more an academic treatise than a report based on field-level interaction. It therefore threw no new light on the definition established in judicial pronouncements. It had also been found that the Committee had not laid down any procedure or methodology for conducting door-to-door surveys for identifying bonded labourers. Moreover, on the basis of the analysis of its recommendations and, more particularly, keeping in mind the directives of the Honourable Justice of the Supreme Court in his judgement of 16 December 1983 in Bandhua Nukhi Narcha v. Union of India, the above-mentioned detailed guidelines were issued to all chief ministers of states in August 1996, and again in January 1997, concerning the definition of bonded labour and the methodology to be adopted for the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. Regarding the complaint of the Mahabugnagar District Palamoori Contract Labour Union, it had been alleged that 600 Palamoori labourers had been engaged by a contractor and were working in conditions akin to bondage. This matter was taken up with the state government of Madhya Pradesh which reported that they were not bonded labourers but in fact contract labourers who had come to work of their own free will.

Concerning responsible bodies, the Government had for a long time considered setting up a commission on bonded labour. However, in the meeting of state labour ministers held on 18 May 1995, it had been decided, by consensus, that since the NHRC had been set up, there was no need for such a commission. The NHRC had full powers to deal with complaints on bonded labour. It could direct investigations, summon attendance of parties concerned on any matter relevant to the issue of bonded labour, and issue directives. The Supreme Court had also directed the NHRC to oversee the entire process of identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. The NHRC had obtained detailed status reports on bonded labour from the Ministry of Labour and had examined the officials of the Ministry of Labour on two occasions. They had also appointed an expert to inquire into and investigate allegations of bonded labour in four states. As regards the vigilance committees, 22 states had filed affidavits in the Supreme Court confirming that they had been set up in each district and sub-division. The report of the National Commission on Rural Labour (NCRL) had been noted by the Committee of Experts in 1991. Ministries of Labour issued detailed guidelines for the creation and reconstitution of vigilance committees wherever necessary as their term was for three years. Their work was overseen by state-level bodies, set up under the chairmanship of the Chief Minister. The Central Board of Workers' Education (CBWE) and the National Labour Institute had also been set up to create awareness among workers of the bonded labour issue. Rural labour training camps were being conducted for this purpose. During 1996-97 the CBWE had organized 1,802 awareness camps in which approximately 70,000 rural workers participated. Trade unions had not played a leading role in this regard so far. They mostly operated in the organized sector, while bonded labour mainly existed in the unorganized sectors of agriculture, plantations, brick kilns, stone quarries, etc. The Government would, however, welcome their involvement. In fact, the outline of a project to involve trade unions to mobilize and organize workers in the unorganized sector through workers' education was being worked out with the ILO. As regards the involvement of voluntary agencies, the Government had welcomed it, and had issued detailed guidelines to ensure the involvement of voluntary agencies through such institutional mechanisms as vigilance committees. There were also provisions in the scheme to give grants to those voluntary agencies which identified bonded labourers. According to available information, the State Government of Tamil Nadu had conducted a survey in association with an NGO in which 25,000 bonded labourers were identified. Kerala had entrusted a study on the rehabilitation of bonded labourers in some selected districts to the Institute of Social and Economic Change and the Gandhi Labour Institute. Concerning the Committee of Experts' comment regarding the time lag between liberation and rehabilitation, and its request for information on follow-up and relapse to bondage, the Government representative acknowledged the slowness of the process. This was due to a number of factors such as: bonded labourers were required to be issued a release certificate; landless and assetless, they were to be rehabilitated preferably through a group approach which involved bringing them to a common point and providing them with inputs for rehabilitation (land, credit, seeds, etc.) all of which involved time-consuming coordination. Nevertheless, the results were there: out of 250,000 or so bonded labourers identified by the earlier survey, 231,000 had been rehabilitated. Of the 29,000 fresh cases of bonded labour, the Central Government had asked for fast action by the states, and Tamil Nadu had responded with a commitment to rehabilitate 10,000 bonded labourers during 1997-98. The Central Government had released 30 million rupees for rehabilitation of 6,000 bonded labourers in 12 states; it had issued the details of guidelines to the states for integration of this centrally sponsored scheme into other ongoing anti-poverty schemes so as to pool the available resources for effective rehabilitation of bonded labourers. No countrywide assessment had yet been made on the integration and results thereof.

Concerning enforcement, section 16 of the Bonded Labour (Liberation) Act, 1976 set out the punishments for violation of the Act. It provided for imprisonment of up to three years and a fine of up to 2,000 rupees. To expedite justice, executive magistrates had been given the powers of judicial magistrates to try allegations of violations. Summary trials had been prescribed. Information on punishment given in respect of fresh violations of the Act was being collected from the states.

Concerning children in bonded labour, the Act did not make a distinction between adult and child bonded labourers. Information received from the states indicated that the problem of child bonded labour was marginal: out of 251,000 bonded labourers, the number of child bonded labourers was 3,300. Of the recently identified 29,000 new cases of bonded labour, information on the number of children involved was currently being collected from state governments and would be provided to the Committee of Experts as soon as available. Following the Supreme Court decision of 10 December 1996 in the case of M.C. Mehta v. the State of Tamil Nadu, a number of follow-up steps had been taken: state governments had been rapidly sent detailed guidelines, on 26 December 1996, indicating the manner in which the Supreme Court's instructions could be given effect; a meeting of the National Authority on the Elimination of Child Labour had been convened on 31 December 1996 to discuss the directives of the Supreme Court; on 22 January 1997 a conference of state labour ministers had been convened to finalize concrete action plans for the implementation of the directives; following that conference, state governments had been sent detailed guidelines for carrying out the surveys directed by the Supreme Court; lastly another conference of state labour ministers had been held on 7-8 July 1997 to review the action taken by state governments. It was found that most states had completed the survey and that the child labour rehabilitation-cum-welfare funds recommended by the Supreme Court were in the process of being constituted. In many cases, employers of children in non-hazardous occupations had been issued notices requiring that no child be allowed to work for more than six hours a day and obliging the arrangement of at least two hours' education for children at the employers' cost. Based on the information received from the states, an affidavit was filed in the Supreme Court on 5 December 1997 attesting to the fact that the first phase of surveys had been completed, except in Nagpur; 500,000 child labourers (below the age of 14 years) had been identified, of which 100,000 were engaged in hazardous occupations and 400,000 in non-hazardous occupations; states where employment of child labourers in hazardous occupations had been found had already initiated action for setting up district child labour welfare-cum-rehabilitation funds; in some districts, funds had already set up; in a number of states, separate units had been established so as to ensure enforcement and monitoring of the various provisions of the Act. The Central Government had initiated action to amend the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 to make it more effective on the basis of suggestions received from the states.

Regarding protection against sexual exploitation, the Government representative stated that the states had been requested to set up advisory committees for the eradication of child prostitution and to devise welfare programmes for them. Further information on this was not yet available from the states, but as soon as information was available it would be provided to the Committee of Experts.

The Employers' members noted that this case had been examined for the last ten years, most recently in 1995. In 1994 the Conference Committee had dedicated a special paragraph to the case in its report. They said that it was essential that information be ascertained as to the extent of bonded and compulsory labour, the exact responsible bodies and the situation of the rehabilitation measures for persons liberated from bonded labour. Moreover, the situation of children in bondage was a special and severe problem. Turning to the magnitude of the problem, they noted that different numbers had been indicated, but that until today no comprehensive survey existed: the Government had announced a number of 256,000 bonded labourers freed; other estimates referred to between 5 and 10 million bonded labourers. The Human Rights Committee of the United Nations had also observed a lack of effective measures to eradicate this problem. The Government had made reference to the States' responsibility to identify the magnitude of bonded labour and to release bonded labourers and also referred to meetings between the Central and state governments, but there had never been a final decision coming out of that. Moreover, state governments denied the existence of bonded labour and the Government waited for the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision before taking a final decision on the need for an all-India survey to ascertain the extent of bonded labour. The Government also had not replied to observations of NGOs on this subject. The Employers' members accordingly pointed out that the situation to start with was unsatisfactory and unacceptable. Turning to the question of who was responsible for dealing with this question, they stated that this also could not be clarified. Although the Act of 1976 abolished bonded labour and several supervisory committees had been established, these committees were not always active. Also it was not clear at all with whom the legislative competence laid, whether it was directly for the federal Government to create a legal framework or only in the event that the state government had not used its legislative competence. The Employers' members emphasized the necessity to have a clear assignment in terms of legal competence in order to establish a network of agencies to coordinate the abolition of bonded labour. In this respect, trade unions should be involved since bonded labour also existed in sectors covered by their activities. Nevertheless, all activities had to be coordinated and follow the same direction. Coming to the issue of rehabilitation, because of limited information, there was not a complete picture about the rehabilitation schemes to reintegrate bonded labourers. Some States had provided for the payment of a certain amount of money, others provided an allotment of houses and land, but these were only details which had not led to the establishment of a rehabilitation scheme valid all over India. Moreover, there was no information available with regard to legal proceedings and their outcome.

Turning to the very serious and unacceptable problem of children in bondage and other forms of compulsory labour, the Employers' members observed that the Government had not replied to observations received from the World Confederation of Labour in 1997 on bonded child labour. Although it was difficult to distinguish whether the situations described comprised bonded labour or other forms of forced child labour, particularly with respect to the most hazardous forms of work which had been performed under situations of constraint, no doubts appeared as to the existence of compulsory child labour on a large scale in the country. They welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court of 1996, according to which a number of actions had to be undertaken: withdrawal of children working in hazardous industries, establishment of a survey to identify children in hazardous industries and a contribution to a fund established for the education of children to be paid by offending employers of children in hazardous industries, employment to be provided to one adult member of the family of a child withdrawn from work and financial assistance for families of the children withdrawn from work. Turning to the problem of sexual exploitation of children and child prostitution, they noted that some welfare programmes had been established for children's care, protection, development and rehabilitation. However, information on the scope and implementation of these programmes was needed. In this connection, they noted that the Tata Institute had done some research on this subject which should be noted by the ILO. They also observed that the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations had deplored the extent of child prostitution. On the basis of the information available, they criticized the Government's not having supplied detailed information on this special problem. They noted that the Government representative stated that there was no information available on sexual exploitation of children. The Employers' members concluded by urging the Government to provide detailed information in particular on the magnitude of the problem; without it, no proper solution could be found. Although they recognized the Government's arguments and the difficulties resulting from the country's federal structure, they emphasized that the Government was responsible for implementing existing legislation in this field. A consistent and complete policy was needed in this regard.

The Workers' members indicated that despite the statement made by the Government representative of India, now and in previous years, the situation remained the same with very little evidence of any progress whatsoever after 14 years of discussions in this Committee. The Workers' members emphasized that the daily reality for millions of Indian citizens was that they lived under conditions of quasi-slavery with little or no hope that their lives would ever improve. The Committee of Experts quoted figures as high as 5 million adult bonded labourers and 10 million child bonded labourers. Some reputable groups claimed the figures were even higher while the Government admitted to only a fraction of this amount. It appeared to the Workers' members that the Government remained unwilling even to identify the dimension of the problem, let alone implement effective measures to address it. After all these years, there was still a great deal of scepticism on the part of the Committee of Experts, the Employers' members, and the Workers' members themselves that a comprehensive and effective programme had been put into place to eliminate bonded labour in compliance with the Convention.

In paragraph 3 of its report, the Committee of Experts identified itself with a very important observation made last August by the United Nations Human Rights Committee on considering the state report of India on the observance of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Human Rights Committee observed that "eradication measures which had been taken do not appear to be effective in achieving real progress in the release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers". The Committee of Experts went on to urge the Government once again, in paragraph 7, to take "strong and effective measures to identify and release bonded labourers in the country and to gather statistics which will allow a reliable picture of the problem and the monitoring of the effectiveness of measures to correct it". In this regard, the Committee of Experts noted that, in March 1995, the Supreme Court had ordered an independent survey to be done in 13 states to verify the claims of these states that bonded labour no longer existed in them and to determine whether the practice of bonded labour had actually been eliminated. Now, over three years later, the Government said that it was awaiting the outcome of the survey before deciding whether a national survey was necessary. The continuing lack of movement in even identifying the problem was of great concern. The Workers' members once again urged the Government to conduct a comprehensive national survey of the magnitude of the problem. They recognized that this was not an easy task and perhaps this was an area where the ILO and other international organizations could be of help.

The Committee of Experts had then addressed the issue of what government bodies were responsible for dealing with bonded labour, in paragraphs 8 to 11 of its report, expressing regret as it had in the past that "there is now no regular overview of the situation published by any government agency". The issue of federal responsibility versus state responsibility was taken up here and elsewhere. This was an area of particular concern given the fact, as the Committee of Experts had noted, that "state governments have all taken the stand that there are no more bonded labourers to be identified, released and rehabilitated in their states". Given this view of the states, it appeared that the national government needed help at the local level if it was to tackle bonded labour in any serious way. The Committee of Experts had continually asked for information on the functioning of vigilance committees required under the Bonded Labour System Act of 1976. Little new information had been forthcoming with the unavoidable conclusion that very few, if any, of the vigilance committees were functioning at all. Especially worrisome was the fact that the Committee of Experts had been informed by the Government of India that funding for voluntary organizations to fight against bonded labour had been transferred to the states. In paragraph 12, the Committee of Experts asked for information on how this was working. The information the Committee had was that very little, if any, funding had been provided to any indigenous NGOs with the expertise and the will to help the Government begin to tackle the problem.

Finally, in paragraph 11, the Committee of Experts found it necessary to again raise the issue of trade union involvement in ending bonded labour. As the Committee of Experts noted, bonded labour clearly existed in a number of sectors where workers had the right to organize, such as stone quarries, brick kilns, building and road construction, forestry, bidi workers and carpet weavers. Rather than resisting the involvement of trade unions in the effort to eliminate bonded labour in such industries, the Government was urged to view them as valuable and effective partners and to enlist them in the effort. The Government representative had said that his Government would move in this direction and the Workers' members hoped that it would.

The Indian Government continued to hold the position that a national commission on bonded labour to implement the 1976 Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act was not necessary, arguing that this was the role of the National Human Rights Commission established in 1993. Yet in paragraph 9 of its report, the Committee of Experts indicated that very little information about the National Human Rights Commission had been forthcoming despite repeated requests particularly in the areas of what powers the National Human Rights Commission actually had and what action it had taken to implement the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act. It would be extremely helpful if the Government representative provided the Committee with much greater information than it had provided so far on what action the National Human Rights Commission had actually taken.

With regard to the issue of enforcement taken up in paragraph 17 of its report, the Committee of Experts noted that "the Government has indicated that no additional prosecutions have been brought because of the absence of any fresh identification of bonded labour". The Government representative confirmed this in his comments. The lack of prosecutions had been put forth by the Government in the past as confirmation of its long-standing denial of the existence of bonded labour to any significant extent. For the Workers' members the small number of prosecutions raised serious doubts that the Government was committed to eradicating bonded and child labour at all. In addition, a number of the measures identified by the Government, such as the establishment of the welfare fund for the education of children working in hazardous industries, depended upon contributions made by offending employers. The fact that there had been little or no prosecutions suggested that contributions from offending employers had a long way to go before such schemes could have any real impact.

The issue of children in bondage and other forms of compulsory labour was taken up by the Committee of Experts in paragraphs 18 to 28 with the Committee of Experts concluding in paragraph 20 that "it does not appear to be in doubt that compulsory child labour exists on a large scale in the country". Again the Government appeared to dispute this conclusion. Three years ago when this Committee last considered this case there was a great deal of concern expressed for the safety of Kailash Sathyarti, the leader of the South Asia Coalition of Child Servitude. Just prior to the 1995 Conference, Kailash had been imprisoned and had his life threatened for his denunciation of child labour in the carpet industry. Now, three years later, Kailash had led the Global March into the International Labour Conference last week and had spoken at its opening session. The Workers' members hoped that this kind of international attention would provide further protection to organizations and people like Kailash who worked in very practical ways, often at great personal risk, to eradicate child and bonded labour.

In paragraphs 25 to 27, the Committee of Experts dealt with the horrific problem of child prostitution and the trafficking of women and girls into forced prostitution. The Government representative indicated that he had no information to provide on the issue. Once again, the Committee of Experts shared the deep concerns expressed by the UN Human Rights Committee over the lack of effective measures to prevent such practices and to protect and rehabilitate the victims. Furthermore, the Committee of Experts endorsed the conclusions of the UN Human Rights Committee that forced prostitution was incompatible with Convention No. 29 and that provisions of the Immoral Trafficking Prevention Act, which among other things criminalized women who had been forced into prostitution and placed the burden of proof on a woman to prove she was not a prostitute, must be changed to be in compliance with Convention No. 29.

The Workers' members truly appreciated the complexities of this problem especially in such a large, highly populated and poor country as India. They understood how difficult it would be to eliminate bonded labour under such circumstances and that it would not happen overnight, but what they had been looking for over the past 14 years was, first, an acknowledgement from the Government of India that there was a significant bonded labour problem in India affecting not only adults but millions of children. And, secondly, they wished to see the Government of India put into effect a comprehensive and coordinated series of measures at the national, state and local levels which included the active involvement of trade unions, NGOs and employers, which corresponded to the huge dimension of the problem and, finally, which produced real and demonstrable results. Neither this Committee, during the previous seven Committee discussions dating back to 1986, nor the Committee of Experts had yet been convinced that any real progress had been made and, unfortunately, from the point of view of the Workers' members, they had heard very little today to indicate anything new.

The Employer member of India underlined that it was important for the Committee to understand the socio-economic situation prevailing in India, as well as the cultural background to have a better appreciation of the situation on Convention No. 29. He recalled that the comments of the Committee of Experts regarding the lack of effective measures adopted by the Government to eliminate bonded labour had to be seen in the context that India was a vast country and had a federal system of government. Labour was a concurrent subject, being the competence of the state governments as well as of the Central Government of India. Therefore, the Central Government had to obtain the information on the action of release and rehabilitation of bonded labour from the state governments which were the enforcing authorities.

He recalled that bonded labour did not exist and was not used in the formal sector but mostly in rural areas and in jobs of a casual nature. It was therefore difficult to identify the bonded labour which was quite often of a migratory nature, meaning that the Government did not have a reliable system of identification of bonded labour. However, he stated that the general awareness generated by the Government against engaging bonded labour had been quite broad and that the vast coverage had raised awareness about the punishment of persons involved in engaging bonded labour. This had a very positive impact. He strongly emphasized that employer organizations in India were against forced labour. The persons who were using forced labour were not members of employers' organizations and therefore they had no direct influence on them. He declared that it was not for the Government to involve the trade unions in the process of eliminating forced labour but that the trade unions should initiate action to organize the forced labour workers in informal sectors and make use of the government machinery in the elimination of forced labour. He believed that it was for trade union leaders to organize them to safeguard their interest since employers' organizations could not initiate the matter nor could the Government. He regretted that not many voluntary organizations were operating in the area of bonded labour.

He recalled that until bonded labour was identified, the process of rehabilitation would suffer. However, from the Government's report, he noted that where bonded labourers had been freed, the Government was spending 10,000 rupees per person for their rehabilitation. He suggested that the Government should arrange for some skilled training of the freed bonded labourers in order to make them employable.

He considered that child labour and bonded child labour were an issue for a separate committee at this Conference. However, he recalled that employers' organizations in India were strongly opposed to the use of child labour including child labour in bondage. On the other hand, he felt that the engagement of children in work by their parents on account of compulsion of economic necessities did not amount to the bonded labour of children and that such cases should be dealt with separately. Furthermore, he considered that the problems of child prostitution and trafficking of women and girls, while a serious concern which the Government as well as NGOs should take upon themselves to eradicate, should be dealt with separately since the problems and solutions were different from forced labour issues. He felt that international agencies should support the efforts made in India for the elimination of bonded labour with greater vigour. Finally, he expressed his optimism that the day was not far away where this problem could be resolved if the work was performed with commitment and cooperation by all concerned.

The Worker member of India, speaking on behalf of his organization, the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh which represented over 4 million workers, pointed out that the real causes behind the problem of forced labour were poverty and illiteracy and the fact that more than 40 per cent of 950 million people lived below the poverty line was a significant factor. He agreed that the Government had to play a role which in his view it was doing now. The Supreme Court had also come into the picture as had the National Human Rights Commission. The Central Government, as well as governments at the state level, and the judiciary were very sincere in their attempts to eliminate this problem. However, it had to be acknowledged that this was not a problem that could be eliminated in ten or 15 years. Patience was needed since it had only been 50 years since India had achieved independence.

The Worker member of Brazil, declared that he shared the concerns of the Committee of Experts concerning the persisting and serious problem of bonded labour in India which was of enormous proportions. The first step in order to resolve this problem was to identify the bonded labourers and gather all pertinent data including the reasons for the tardiness in solving the problem. The present Committee should urge the Government to conduct such studies and to formulate efficient policies aimed at freeing and reintegrating the workers concerned, and to increase the existing sanctions in national legislation. The Government should also accept to work in collaboration with the civil community and with trade unions and to rely on the expertise of the ILO multidisciplinary teams. This would enable it to gather information, to adopt appropriate national policies and to accelerate the resolution of this problem. The Committee should urge the Government to adopt the above-mentioned measures.

The Worker member of Zimbabwe indicated that although there was no agreement on the number of children or adults in bondage or in other forms of compulsory labour in India, it was quite clear from the evidence that bonded labour of children and adults existed and could be on the increase judging by the information on the extent of its magnitude. He considered that irrespective of the magnitude of the problem, bonded labour should be eradicated in all its forms, especially that of children. He felt that even if there was only one child held in bonded labour, this should be condemned. Furthermore, he felt that it was unthinkable to see such medieval practices in a country engaged in nuclear testing. Therefore, he urged the Government of India to take measures to strengthen the measures taken to ensure its full conformity with the provisions of Convention No. 29.

The Worker member of Germany referred to children in bondage and other forms of compulsory labour as representing a special and severe problem. He thought that the information provided by the Government had not been sufficient in view of the magnitude of the problem, considering that this problem did not include children subject to child labour who had received assistance from the ILO's International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC). Although the case had been pending for 14 years, full information had not been supplied to the Committee of Experts by the Government. In order to illustrate this lack of information, he mentioned three examples contained in the report of the Committee of Experts. The Committee of Experts was still asking for plans on future action regarding the "Identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded child labour". Turning to the Government's order to establish an advisory committee for the eradication of child labour in all states, the Committee of Experts had not been informed whether these committees had been formed and what form their work had taken so far. Moreover, in the State of Uttar Pradesh, the state government had conducted a survey of the problem of alleged child prostitution without providing any results to the Committee of Experts. He once again reiterated the importance of Convention No. 29, in particular with a view to children in bondage and child prostitution. He therefore was of the opinion that the Government should be urged to supply detailed information in order to enable a full examination. He recognized the difficulties of many families in the socio-economic circumstances which forced them to raise a loan which often could be paid back only through child labour. However, since the Government had not acknowledged the existence of bonded child labour, it had to indicate whether the Supreme Court decision of 1996, quoted in the Committee of Experts' report, had been binding throughout India or only for the State of Tamil Nadu, and how many children had been sent to school after their liberation from bonded labour. Moreover, the Government should provide information on the number of employers contributing to the welfare fund established for the education of children who had been working in hazardous industries. Furthermore, he recalled the Government's statement referred to in the plenary of this Committee when its case had been examined in 1995, where it had promised to liberate 2 million children from hazardous labour by the year 2000. The Government therefore should be asked to what extent this promise had become a reality. He concluded by expressing deep concern as regards the Government's indication that no detailed information was available on the problem of child prostitution. Against the background of the observations made by the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations in 1997 and the findings of the Committee of Experts, this statement showed a lack of conscience on the part of the Government. He emphasized that the conclusions of the Conference Committee should show its deep concern over this situation.

The Worker member of Colombia stated that the Committee was yet again faced with a serious problem, namely the problem of bonded labour. Bonded labour constitutes not only a flagrant violation of Convention No. 29, but also of the most basic and fundamental human rights. There was no doubt that this abhorrent form of exploitation should be eradicated. Priority should be given to freeing children in such circumstances. Moreover, methods should be developed for the freeing of adults. He questioned whether the political will to eradicate this scourge existed, whether the employers were willing to strive towards such a goal, and what political economic policy had been envisaged which would ensure a proper distribution of revenues. He considered that a more detailed examination should be undertaken. In conclusion, he emphasized that the Committee should urge the Government to assume its role to protect children as well as adults from a form of exploitation which a large proportion of the population was subjected to and stressed that it would be otherwise difficult to talk of peace, democracy and development in the world.

The Worker member of Pakistan believed that since children were the future of the prosperity of mankind, what was needed to address this problem, especially in developing countries, was the allocation of more resources for the education and training of children. The system itself denied equal opportunities to the children of the poor. While the Government of India definitely had an interest in allocating more resources to the education and training of children in order to address the problem of child labour, there were also other parties in society who had resources which should be devoted to children's education. This problem, which had its origins in poverty and illiteracy, required a continuous and concerted effort on the part of the Government. One of the ways of solving certain aspects of the problem of child labour would be to follow the recommendations of the Committee of Experts.

The Government representative of India thanked the delegates for their various comments. Referring to a point raised by several speakers as to why no comprehensive survey had been carried out by the Government, he indicated that the Supreme Court had directed that a lawyer and a voluntary agency be entrusted with the task of carrying out this survey. Therefore, the Central Government was not in the picture with regard to the carrying out of such a survey. Moreover, it had accepted the fact that only 29,000 bonded labourers had been identified and the Supreme Court had accepted these figures. He therefore did not see the basis of bringing up a figure of 10 million. With regard to the working of the vigilance committees, he assured the Committee that they were operating in each district in India. The Supreme Court had entrusted the National Human Rights Commission, an independent body, with the responsibility of coordinating the abolition of bonded labour. Therefore, the entire problem was out of the hands of the Central Government and was now at the level of independent agencies.

Another Government representative pointed out that child labour was an issue that required great sensitivity. The newly elected Government was totally committed to the elimination of child labour. This was reflected by the fact that the budgetary provisions for education had been increased by the new Government in the budget recently presented to Parliament. However, the Central Government could not bulldoze state governments, who were sovereign, into considering this as a priority. She indicated that child labour, like bonded labour, could be found largely in the unorganized sector, especially agriculture. In this sector, a large number of children helped their parents carry out various tasks and therefore this could not be strictly termed as child labour. She emphasized that the two main reasons for child labour were parental poverty and illiteracy. Another cause was unemployment and underemployment, phenomena that were known to other countries as well. The fact that her Government was committed to solving this problem was reflected in the establishment of a number of poverty alleviation schemes. Moreover, a National Commission on the Elimination of Child Labour had been set up under the chairmanship of the Union Labour Minister. Her country had adopted a multi-pronged approach to solve this problem. The last, but perhaps most important, point was the issue of sustainability. Even if, for example, 100 million children were released from child labour, the problem would not go away if this could not be sustained and they went back to child labour. Finally, it was important to note that National Child Labour Projects had attempted to resolve the situation of around 100,000 children and that India was the first signatory in 1992 to the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC).

Another Government representative pointed out that since labour was a subject with concurrent jurisdiction, the responsibility for the enforcement of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, was left to state governments. Due account had to be taken of the immensity of India with its wide disparities between different groupings along caste, class, ethnic, linguistic and other lines. It was difficult to paint Indian society with the same brush since it was a very fragmented society. While the fragmented nature of the society, the wide economic discrepancies and the lack of education contributed enormously to the problem of bonded labour, the lack of awareness of the affected persons also contributed greatly to this problem. In his experience, many bonded labourers did not have the capacity to realize that they were in bondage, and after having been released, often relaxed back into bondage. While this was not a justification for the existence of the problem, it was an explanation. He pointed out that the National Sample Survey Organization had estimated ten years back that there were 350,000 bonded labourers. This organization followed certain statistical principles which were very accurate. He was sure that since the intensity of the enforcement of the Child and Bonded Labour Acts had increased, there had been considerable reduction in this figure of 350,000 bonded labourers, although he was not sure of the exact number today.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom wished to draw attention to an international statistical figure, namely that over 100 million people in India had wealth greater than the average wealth of the population of Western Europe. This statistic was significant when discussing the continued problem of child labour and poverty.

The Workers' members recognized the immensity of the problem of child labour in a country as large and poor as India. Even in the United States, child labour appeared to be on the rise and there had even been some highly publicised cases, recently, of bonded labour. While poverty was one of the causes of child labour, it was not the only factor. Moreover, if lack of resources to combat bonded labour was such a problem, as was argued by the Government, then perhaps India should consider redirecting its priorities away from defence expenditures and testing nuclear weapons. The Workers' members reiterated that the Government should provide much more detailed information not only on the existence of vigilance committees but more importantly on what specific actions that vigilance committees have taken to reduce bonded labour and bonded child labour. They challenged the Government's contention that surveys ordered by the Supreme Court had uncovered only a small number of bonded labourers, citing the UN Human Rights Committee's conclusion that the incidence of bonded labour reported to the Supreme Court was far higher than reported by the Government. The Workers' members regretted the fact that the Government had tried to minimize a very serious problem, of which there was much evidence, and that it had provided little information in this respect. In view of the fact that there were few positive changes in the situation since this case had been discussed on previous occasions, the Workers' members asked the Committee to inject a sense of urgency in the Government to take action without any further delay by expressing its concerns over this case in the strongest possible terms.

The Employers' members referred to the answers given by the Government representatives during the course of the discussion which showed that the core of the problem was the identification of bonded labour. They observed that the figures given on bonded labourers had varied: 29,000 bonded labourers had been recognized by the court decision, but the Government representatives had mentioned a number of 350,000 bonded labourers. This also showed that the problem of bonded labour was in fact ignored. In this connection, the Employers' members said that it was not clear whether court proceedings followed the principle of party initiative which was the principle that the institution and conduct of proceedings were determined by the parties, so that only those facts provided by the parties could serve as a basis for the final decision or whether the decision had to be found on the basis of a determination of all facts by official legal process. Thus, applying one or the other principle accordingly had an influence as regards the finding of the number of bonded labourers.

Turning to the Government's indication on the difficult socio-economic situation in the country, the Employers' members said that they could provide some advice regarding the right use of economic resources but that this matter was not in the competence of this Committee. With respect to the implementation of federal laws at the state level, they stressed that federal influence was possible and that the trade unions should play a greater role in this respect. They once again made reference to the Tata Institute which could provide assistance concerning the determination of the magnitude of the problem. They ended with the statement that the Government's reply was not satisfactory and that therefore it should be urged to provide a detailed report on the subject-matter and on the questions raised in this debate. The Government should also make coordinated policy efforts with those concerned by problems of bonded labour.

The Government representative took note of the advice given by certain delegates, according to which less priority should be given to his Government's defence expenditures and indicated that this information would be duly reported to his Government. He further emphasized that the figure of 2 million children in bonded labour cited by certain delegates was wrong since this figure involved children working in hazardous conditions.

The Committee took note of the oral information supplied by the Government representatives and of the discussion which ensued. It noted with regret that this was a case which had been discussed in this Committee six times over the past decade and that, despite the Government's assurances of seriousness in attacking the problems, little progress towards full compliance with the provisions of the Convention had been achieved. The Committee urged the Government to respond to the points raised in the communication of the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) on bonded child labour. The Committee stressed that only through maintaining a dialogue and concrete and coordinated measures, could steps forward be taken. As regards bonded labour, the scope of the question remained disputed, yet the Government had carried out no new national surveys. Contradictory information was also before the Committee of Experts about whether the vigilance committees, which were supposed to be set up under the 1976 Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, were actually functioning. Enforcement in general remained moot and it should be clarified which exactly were the responsible bodies in this area. The Committee noted with deep concern that the situation of children in bondage and other forms of compulsory labour had not considerably improved, despite the Government's stated commitment to eliminating it, as demonstrated by its work within the ILO's International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC). The Committee also regretted that the Government representatives were not able to give the details requested on the protection against sexual exploitation of children. The Committee expressed its deep concern regarding bonded labour as well as regarding children in bondage and urged the Government to step up its actions, and to report in detail on any progress made at national, state and local levels in a comprehensive report to the Committee of Experts.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1995, Publication: 82nd ILC session (1995)

A Government representative of India, referring to the detailed reports supplied by the Government in June 1994 and February 1995, shared the concern shown by the Committee of Experts on the application of this very important Convention and continued by clarifying the various points made by the Committee in paragraphs 1-3 and paragraphs 42-48 of its observation. He assured the Committee that the well-founded critical concern largely expressed by the Committee of Experts would only spur the Government to intensify its efforts in the application of this Convention more effectively in his country. The method used in assessing a situation in a country, while having certainly its merits, had its own limitations too. For obvious reasons it could only refer to what had happened in the past or at best in the recent past, and it would never reflect the current position adequately. He therefore concentrated his presentation on certain current developments which showed that India was moving with a better pace and in the right direction with genuine intentions.

One of the very important and central observations made in paragraph 2, with reference to bonded labour, was that the situation in practice did not appear to have improved very much. Elsewhere, the Committee of Experts also said that systematic identification of bonded labourers under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act of 1976, had been stalled in practice for several years. This observation, in his opinion, was based on the fact that the number of bonded labourers identified, released and rehabilitated was not increasing substantially beyond the 250,000 figure reported from 1991 onwards. This was certainly a very important issue. However, the administration and enforcement of this Act essentially lay with the state governments. Currently all of them had taken a stand that there were no more bonded labourers to be identified, released and rehabilitated in their states. To clarify this very significant stand taken by the state governments, the speaker referred to the interim order of the Supreme Court dated 6 March 1995, by which the Supreme Court appointed in 13 states the advocates and the voluntary organizations which had been assigned to determine whether the practice of bonded labour had actually been eradicated in the states concerned. Local administrations were ordered to provide these advocates and voluntary organizations with assistance in the discharge of their duties and state governments were required to bear their operational costs.

Another Supreme Court Order relating to a case of bonded labour inquiry in Haryana State, was referred to in the other paragraphs of the Committee's report. As it was alleged that there were 4,000 bonded labourers working the quarries neighbouring Delhi, the Supreme Court had appointed a committee to identify each of the bonded labourers. This committee could identify only approximately 2,000 labourers and had reported back to the Supreme Court saying that none of these labourers considered themselves a bonded labourer in need of any rehabilitation assistance. These two Supreme Court judgements had clearly demonstrated that on the part of some of the non-governmental organizations there was a propensity to exaggerate the figures of bonded labour. Everybody now was keenly awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court after the appointed advocates and agencies reported back to the Supreme Court on this question. These developments, however, did not prevent the issue of fresh surveys by the state governments to identify some more bonded labourers. One of the state governments, namely Karnataka, reported that the survey done in seven out of 20 districts had revealed that there was not a single case of relapse into bondage, and very few new cases could be identified in this exercise.

A number of positive developments had taken place as a consequence of the regional conferences which had been held at the highest level by the Cabinet Minister of the Union of India, with the labour ministers of all states. The rehabilitation assistance given to bonded labour was enhanced to Rps.10,000, from Rps.6,500 per individual. The target for the current year 1995-96 had been revised to about 7,000 to be rehabilitated, and approximately the equivalent of US$2 million was already earmarked to wipe out the backlog of the already identified bonded labourers. The states on their part were also improving their efforts in this direction. For example, in the state of Kerala, tribal bonded labour had been rehabilitated in very innovative ways by settling them in plantations relating to spices, tea and dairy farming. Similarly, Andhra Pradesh, one of the states with the highest incidence, had also provided the bonded labourers, wherever they have been rehabilitated, with the land and other inputs on cooperative farming wastes. The speaker hoped that this information reasonably answered the concern of the Committee of Experts about the apparent lack of improvement in the situation and the lack of increased identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers.

Another central observation of the Committee of Experts in paragraph 2 said that a number of proposals and recommendations made by the National Commission on Rural Labour in 1991, with a view to improving the situation, had not so far been implemented. There were mainly two recommendations made by this National Commission. The first one was that in many non-agricultural occupations bonded labour elements had been noticed but had not been adequately identified by surveys and studies. In this respect the Act did not distinguish between bonded labour in agriculture and bonded labour in non-agricultural activities, and two Supreme Court judgements referred to earlier provided an interim answer to this recommendation. The second recommendation made by the National Commission on Rural Labour was that of setting up a national commission on bonded labour. This had also been recommended, as noted by the Committee of Experts, by a working group on contemporary forms of slavery in July 1990. The Government had examined this proposal very carefully and reported that a national human rights commission would perform this function. There was also the prospect of a number of state-level human rights commissions being formed very shortly. However, the Government had also appointed a committee, under the chairmanship of the Labour Minister of Madras, to study the need to form a national commission on bonded labour. Unfortunately, the report of this body was not yet available. These were the Government's responses to paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the observation of the Committee of Experts.

With respect to paragraphs 42-48, which mainly dealt with child labour problems, the Government representative pointed out that India had ratified six ILO Conventions relating to child labour, and was pursuing a national policy on child labour, adopted by Parliament in 1987. This policy was designed with reference to the resolution of the ILC in 1979, and called for a three-pronged action to deal with this problem. Paragraphs 42-48 referred to two of those strategies, namely, legislative action and a focused action to eliminate child labour. The third strategy dealt with the overall development of the special groups from where most child labour came. In paragraph 42 the Committee of Experts asked for a comprehensive report on the situation of children in bondage. While the Government had supplied a report in February 1995, there had been significant developments from February 1995 until now.

Firstly, in the 11 to 12 states where the incidence of child labour was highest in the country, 100 districts were identified for immediate priority action and the heads of all these districts were called for a meeting in August 1995 to finalize districts' specific plans for elimination of child labour in hazardous employment. It was also proposed to associate the local ILO representative to assist in this meeting. The circular referred to by the Committee of Experts in this regard in paragraph 45, concerning the identification, release and rehabilitation of child labour, had been personally sent by the Prime Minister of India to all heads of state departments and to all chief ministers. The heads of state governments had given a positive response to step up their efforts and individual state governments had already drawn up their plans of action. A plan equivalent to US$300 million was approved for the elimination of child labour in hazardous employment by the year 2000 and, as an initial step, about US$15 million had already been placed at the disposal of the Ministry of Labour to tackle this problem in the first year. Already funds had been released for state-wide surveys of child labour in big states like Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and Ulresa. A massive awareness-raising campaign was under way in all print and electronic media all over the country.

With respect to paragraph 43, pending the adoption of the Bill referred to therein, executive instructions to that effect had already been given to the state governments, therefore now the fixing of lower wages for children compared with adults had been stopped. Process for the adoption of the Bill was under way with the Cabinet having to approve the proposal. Regarding law enforcement statistics, there had been a substantial improvement during the period 1994-95 and there was reason to believe that the number of offences detected, the number of prosecutions launched and the number of punishments given had substantially increased during the period 1994-95 as compared to the 1993-94 period. Concrete figures would be reported by the Government in due time.

Coming to paragraph 46, where the Committee of Experts wished to learn of the follow-up of the report of the subcommittee on the Elimination of Child Labour in the match and fireworks industry in Tamil Nadu, a copy of which had been supplied by the Government in February 1995, some very positive developments were also to be reported here. Welfare committees had been set up for the sake of children working in these factories and employers were contributing 10 rupees and the state government was also contributing 10 rupees towards this welfare fund for each child. The state government had since provided four vehicles, instead of two, for checking up on the health of the children working in these factories. The subcommittee also said that a certain basic diet was to be provided by the employers and it was being done. It had recommended that all these children should have a group insurance scheme provided for them and accordingly such a scheme was already finalized and was under implementation. The premium to be paid was now being revised and a committee under the chairmanship of the district collector had also been appointed to report to the authority on the happenings from time to time. These were the main steps taken as a follow-up of the report of the above-mentioned subcommittee.

The speaker then explained the third strategy adopted in India as part of the national policy on child labour, which concerned overall development programmes focused on the special groups. It was common knowledge that most of the child labour in India belonged to two groups of people called scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. On the whole they constituted 22 per cent of the population. They were identified as the weakest sections of the society and a number of constitutional safeguards were provided for their general upliftment. It was the overall economic development of these groups that could provide the real answer to the problem of child labour. Very many special schemes were afoot following these constitutional provisions all over the country for their betterment. For example, there was a reservation of seats on a rotation basis to these groups in all parliamentary assembly and local body elections all over the country. There were reservations for these groups, up to 15 per cent in the case of scheduled castes and 7 per cent in the case of scheduled tribes, in all employment at local government, state government and central government levels. Free and concessional education at all levels, including higher education, was provided. Free residential schools and colleges were established exclusively for these groups. There were special national-level and state-level commissions National Scheduled Caste Commissions, National Commission on Scheduled Tribes as well as national-level and state-level commissions exclusively to look after their welfare, and exclusive finance development corporations. In the area of rural employment and in the area of primary education in the last few years unprecedented levels of investments had been made. With a consortium of all international lending agencies roughly about US$15 to 25 million would go into each district for development of primary education which would help in reducing the incidence of child labour. There was exclusive earmarking of all budgets in the central government and state governments to these groups. Another important scheme which had a scale and magnitude unprecedented in the whole world was the Integrated Child Development Scheme which pre-empted the entry of the children into the world of work making them prone to reach schools. These points emphasized the fact that overall development policies were oriented towards the welfare of these groups to which most of child labour belonged.

In addition, with the assistance of the Governments of Germany and Belgium, an international programme for the elimination of child labour was already under way and about 55,000 children had already benefited from it. Similarly, with the assistance of the ILO, a Child Labour Action Support Programme was being implemented wherein the ILO supplemented the efforts made by the Government of India in this area. One of the innovative steps taken by the Government was that the Director-General of Employment and Training, who was responsible for the entire national vocational training system, had been made responsible to discharge the duties relating to the elimination of child labour with the view that the parents of these children were to be provided with some vocational training so as to reduce the need for them to send their children to work. In conclusion, the speaker expressed the hope that the Committee would make a finding that India was making sincere efforts and good progress in the areas under review.

The Employers' members thanked the Government representative for his detailed and forthright information. This case had been of continuing interest to the Committee since 1984, and it was the eighth time that it had turned its attention to the serious problems of bonded labour and, perhaps the most serious of all, the question of bonded child labour. This case was so serious in fact, that this Committee last year had found it necessary to put it in a special paragraph of its report. The full dimensions of the bonded labour problem, even to this date over ten years, were still unclear but, according to the available data, might range from a quarter of a million to several million children and adults.

There was a severe problem concerning the collection of information from state governments, and it was particularly disturbing, as reflected in the Experts' report, that the work of the National Sample Survey Organization to gather information on bonded labour was not scheduled to begin before 1998-99. This delay, for reasons that really had not been explained, raised some doubts as to whether the Government was really committed to eradicating bonded labour and child labour.

According to the Government and since at least 1989, there was no gap between bonded labour identified and rehabilitated. It appeared that the number of rehabilitated amounted to about a quarter of a million individuals and this was why the problem of identifying those in bonded labour was so very important. Part of this problem concerned the definition of bonded labour. For the Employers' group it was difficult to understand why the states, which in principle must follow the dictates of federal authority, did not seem willing to follow the definition given in the Bonded Labour System Abolition Act of 1976 as interpreted by the Indian Supreme Court in 1983. There was also the problem of the range of occupations where bonded labour was likely to occur and was not adequately surveyed. The Employers reaffirmed the view of the Experts that it was an urgent matter that necessary measures be taken at the national and state levels for the systematic identification of bonded labour under federal law.

For a number of years this Committee had also been concerned with the fact that vigilance committees, called for under the Bonded Labour System Act, either did not exist or were inoperative or ineffective, and this situation did not seem to have changed. It appeared that the Government was still of the opinion that the better implementation strategy of the Bonded Labour System Act was through state governments' action to eradicate the problem. While the Employers' group did not want to express any particular preference for one solution over another, problems with the surveys identifying bonded labour showed that the Government still did not have an effective centralized control of its system. The state-based strategy did not seem to be working, with the main question being why the states would object that a national authority was to supervise and coordinate at both the national and state levels the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labour. If the state-based system was not as effective as it could be, why not consider an alternative strategy? There was also the problem of the time-lag between liberation and rehabilitation leading to a return to bonded labour in some instances, and this problem was an urgent matter and needed to be corrected as well. And finally, there were very few prosecutions related to bonded labour given the large dimensions of the problem, which again raised the question as to whether the Government was really dedicated to eliminating the problem.

With respect to the Government's intention to take 2 million children out of bonded labour by the year 2000, the Employers questioned whether that estimate was realistic taking into account that, according to the reports received from state governments, only 1,400 child bonded labourers had been identified. Noting the establishment of the national authority for the elimination of child labour and the adoption at the beginning of this year of a blueprint for action that was to be adopted also at the state level, the Employers requested clarification on whether this blueprint was binding on the states and, if it was, whether it was being followed and, if so, in what time-frame the states could be expected to adopt and implement the child labour policy and pursue it as an urgent matter.

Noting the information provided on India's rural development programme, the Employers asked the Government to provide detailed information to the ILO so that the Experts might review this programme in the context of the implementation of Convention No. 29.

In conclusion, the Employers stressed that, notwithstanding the fact that since last year India had adopted some new programmes, no tangible real progress to date in eradicating bonded labour and bonded child labour could be clearly seen. They saw programmes, but what they did not see was progress. The Employers' members were not looking necessarily for more reports or for more policy statements, but they needed to see under some kind of federal/state strategy tangible evidence that bonded and child labour was being eliminated.

The Workers' members recalled that this Committee had discussed this case in 1986, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 and again in 1995, with the report of the Committee of Experts covering this case on nearly 13 pages. While for that reason the Committee decided to limit itself to paragraphs 1 to 3 and paragraphs 42 to 48 of the Experts' report, it was not ignoring the other paragraphs as being unimportant, but was simply trying to concentrate this year its attention on a specific aspect. The nature of the Committee's concern was that there had been a persistent failure in practice to get bonded labour and, in particular, children in bonded labour, under control. The measurement of the concern was shown by the discussion which had taken place in this Committee last year when it reached a conclusion which had been placed in a special paragraph.

It was also important to recognize that the problem of child labour, child servitude, could not be separated from the more general problem of debt bondage which was a persistent and consistent problem in India. In paragraphs 27, 37 and 40 the Experts explained the reason why there was a lack of progress: no network of agencies to supervise and consolidate the abolition of bonded labour (paragraph 27); no effective penal sanctions and enforcement procedure (paragraph 37); very slow enforcement procedures (paragraph 40). All those points were particularly relevant to the discussion today.

Paragraph 42 detailed the allegations which informed the UN Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities of the extent of child bondage and listed the range of occupations in which child bondage was a feature. However, it was not just child bondage that was being dealt with here, but also the facts of kidnapping, beating, sexual abuse, starvation all the things associated with child bondage. That these things existed at all, there could not be any doubt, but the specific identification and some credible methods of establishing the size and the precise nature of the problem had not really been made available, not least because the collection of information failed to distinguish between child and adult bonded labour. In this connection, the Experts in their report had asked for measures specifically related to child labour and for a comprehensive report.

Paragraph 43 referred to the Indian Government's indication that it proposed to amend the Child Labour Act of 1986 so that the minimum wage fixation was abolished and, according to the Government representative, it had actually been abolished. However, it seemed that this particular issue in itself, although perhaps relevant, did not go to the heart of the problem. Nevertheless, if it was going to help in any way, the Committee of Experts should be informed when and how quickly this legislation, if it was passed, was going to be applied.

One of the ways in which the Committee could gain an insight into the practice in a country and measure a government's commitment to its own laws, was to obtain accurate information about prosecutions and the extent of the penalties which existed in a country for dealing with those who failed to obey the law. The Committee of Experts, as it seemed from paragraph 44 of their report, was rather unconvinced that the information provided was either accurate or convincing about this aspect of the Government's commitment. The state governments claimed to have identified 1,400 child bonded labourers against the estimates based on the surveys which pointed to a possible 17 million, 2 million of which were children in hazardous occupations. The figure of 1,400 represented one tiny part of the 2 million children that the ministers promised to take out of bonded labour by the year 2000, with the very substantial budget that the Indian Government had set aside for that purpose. There was no answer, however, as to whether these 2 million children represented the whole of the problem, a significant part of the problem, or a token gesture towards the problem. It might help if the Government representative would give some indications on that in his reply.

Paragraph 45 dealt with the action taken by the Government and the creation of a new body since last year's discussion the National Authority for the Elimination of Child Labour which had already sent out a circular with very laudable objectives. While the Workers' members expressed some scepticism of the ability of committees to solve problems through paperwork, they pointed out that the Government had not yet indicated any timetable for the work of this particular committee. Noting that India's economy was developing at a fairly rapid pace, the Workers considered it essential for the Government to ensure that with that rapid economic development there was, in fact, a priority strategy for dealing with child labour.

Paragraphs 47 and 48 concerning sexual exploitation were in contrast with the official view of sexual exploitation. The magistrates of three areas claimed that they had no knowledge of sexual exploitation, yet there had been 57 raids, and 131 cases had ended up with a conviction. Here again, there were reports of advisory committees being formed to eradicate child prostitution, and of conducting a survey in Pradesh in areas particularly involved in child prostitution, but indeed, the Workers wanted to see a little bit more real action.

The Workers' members expressed deep concern about the arrest of a prominent anti-child labour activist, Mr. Kailash Sathyarti, the leader of the South Asia Coalition of Child Servitude. His arrest was connected with his denunciation of child labour in India's carpet industry, as a result of which there had been a cancellation by IKEA a leading European carpet importer of contracts with firms allegedly employing children in India. Prior to his arrest, he had been subjected to harassment and death threats by the Haryana State Police, and there were strong suggestions in newspaper reports in this particular case of collusion between the local carpet mafia and elements in the Haryana police. Persecution of people who were speaking up publicly about the nature of child labour in India was a new development which had not been seen before, and the Workers strongly hoped that the Indian Government would eradicate it fairly quickly.

The Workers' members concluded by pointing to the need for much more detailed information about the overall size of the problem of bonded labour and specifically in relation to the exploitation of children. They hoped that the Indian Government representative would take back to his Government the need for the figures on this case to be made available to the Committee of Experts so that it could make not only some judgement about the size of the problem, but as the years went by, could be able to see whether there had been any reduction in the problem.

The Workers' member of India referred to paragraph 4 of the report which gave diverse estimates of the figures of bonded labour. The confusion here was mainly due to two reasons: one was that the time lag between the years in which these estimates were given varied between 1970, 1979 to 1990, whilst we were in the year 1995; secondly, the figures given by the different organizations also varied widely. On the one hand, the Government said that the number was around 0.24 million, while the Bonded Labour Liberation Front of India had put the figure at 5 million adults and 10 million child bonded labourers. The figure given by impartial bodies such as the Subcommittee on Bonded Labour, set up by the central Standing Committee on Rural Organized Labour, was 2 million, but that was also in the year 1979. Therefore, the speaker supported the suggestion made by the Workers' spokesman that the Government should come out with the latest figures on this issue.

Referring to paragraph 22 on the involvement of trade unions in this question, he stated that the Government had taken the view that trade unions had not been involved in this issue because trade unions were concerned with organized labour and did not have much to do where bonded labour was employed. However, bonded labourers were working in industries like bricklaying and forestry and construction where trade unions did exist, and the Government should start to involve trade unions who were very active in these fields.

With reference to paragraph 32 on penal sanctions and enforcement, the speaker pointed out that prosecutions on these issues took a long time in India and in the meantime the bonded labour problem could not be solved. Therefore, he suggested that the Government should see to it that these prosecutions were decided speedily and penalties were a deterrent.

Another Workers' member of India asserted that this Committee, as well as the Committee of Experts, was confusing the issues of forced labour and child labour. The authorities of India had taken the decision to abolish the bonded labour system in 1976 and the Supreme Court had ruled in 1983 that engaging in bonded labour was not only inhuman but also illegal and punishable by imprisonment. While he recognized that the problem of child labour was prevalent in India, he did not accept that the situation of children in bonded labour existed. He was talking as a member of one of the biggest trade union centres in the country and as a representative of his national trade union organization. Referring to paragraph 44 of the Experts' observation, he pointed out that, according to statistics, about 1,400 child bonded labourers had been identified and that the number of child labourers was placed at 17.02 million, of whom 2 million were estimated to be engaged in hazardous occupations. Certain speakers had wondered how the Prime Minister of India could state that 2 million children were going to be removed from child labour by the year 2000. However, that was because the latter was referring to child labour and not to bonded labour. He indicated that after the land reforms and the rural development that had taken place in India, 99 per cent of bonded labour had disappeared. In his view, child labour was the major issue against which everyone in his country was struggling. It was a fact that some industries were using child labour. The workers were struggling against this phenomenon, including by going on hunger strikes. Moreover, since it was employers in the private sector who were employing this child labour, the Workers had to force the private sector management to see that it should not engage in such activities. It was inhuman and uncivilized. In addition, the workers were opposed to a minimum wage for children since they were opposed to child labour. This minimum wage was a way of regularizing child labour. However, the Government of India had to make greater efforts in the struggle against child labour. For example, by the middle of the year in primary schools there was a large decrease in attendance. This was because the children had to work to avoid starvation. Therefore, the Government had to start a midday meals programme for these schoolchildren so that they could receive both education and food. The Government had some sort of moral responsibility to ensure this. He concluded by assuring the Government of India of the workers' full support in the struggle to abolish child labour.

The Employers' member of India indicated that all employers and their associations were fully cooperating with the government policy to eliminate bonded and child labour. The employers' associations, through their own channels, were putting pressure for the non-engagement of child labour even on the industries that were engaging them. He emphasized that child labour was used only in the unorganized sector and not in the organized one, and that most unauthorized sector employers were not members of the associations at the apex level. Responding to the point raised by the Workers' member of India as to why there was such a decrease in primary-school attendance, the speaker replied that this was due to the fact that there was so much poverty. Parents did not send children to work for the sake of fun but because their income supported their families. While he did not support this, he had raised this point to illustrate that unless poverty was alleviated, it would be difficult to completely eradicate child labour. Many of the employers in India had taken positive initiatives in establishing schools to help spread education and also the rehabilitation of children at work. Even scholarship schemes had been initiated for children withdrawn from work and put in school. There also had to be an appreciation of the distinction between bonded child labour and child labour. There was no bonded child labour, but child labour obviously existed. This had to be clearly understood. Since India was a large democracy it might take some time to eliminate this evil, but he had no doubt that it would be fully eliminated in due course with the initiatives taken by the Government and supported by the employers and the NGOs. Moreover, he did not agree with the suggestion that products manufactured with the help of child labour should not be used. This could not solve the problem of child labour. Rather it could increase the problem so that, if children could not earn this, it would create other social problems. While employers did not support child labour employment, programmes for the limitation of child labour had to be looked into and effectively utilized to be successful. If children were not to work, adequate integration programmes had to be provided so that these children could be educated.

The Government member of Germany stated that in order to assess the problem in India correctly account should be taken of the comments made in the Experts' report as well as those made by the Government representative. Bonded labour, including child bonded labour, had a very long tradition in India and was thus not a phenomenon which had emerged in the last few years. With regard to the scope and size of the problem, rapid results and solutions could not be found. He agreed with the Employers' member of India that one could not proceed in an unplanned way and "try to send the police or the army into a factory and get the children out" because the children would be employed somewhere else the next day or new children would be brought into the factory. The first step was to try to raise awareness of the problem itself and then combat it. According to the comments made by the Government representative, the Experts, and also from what he knew from other sources, there had been considerable progress over the last few years with regard to awareness of the problem and plans to combat it. This could be traced back to the participation of India in the IPEC programme of the ILO. He had been impressed by what was being done on the legislative level, as reported by the Government representative earlier, although tangible results could not actually be found immediately. His Minister, who had visited India with a high-ranking ILO official, and who had seen some projects that had been carried out under the IPEC programme, had noted that a certain amount of success had been achieved. He welcomed the commitment of many Indian NGOs which were trying to do away with the worst aspects of this phenomenon. Finally, the speaker asked the Government representative to do something for the safety and security of the Chairman of the South Asia Coalition on Child Servitude (Mr. Kailash Sathyarti), who had been threatened by a carpet manufacturer in India with regard to the statements he had made concerning child labour in the carpet industry in India.

The Government member of Iceland, speaking on behalf of the Governments of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, indicated that it was clear from the observation made by the Committee of Experts that this case concerned serious violations of Convention No. 29. These violations consisted, amongst others, of bonded labour, child labour and child prostitution. He wholeheartedly supported the long-standing request made to the Government of India by the Experts for urgent improvements so that the situation could be brought in line with the provisions of Convention No. 29.

The Workers' member of France regretted the confusion that had arisen due to the discrepancy in the figures from different sources. In spite of the efforts at persuasion by the Government representative of India, one was obliged to note that this country had ratified Convention No. 29 40 years ago, although it had decided to abolish bonded labour only 20 years ago. It was difficult to believe in these conditions that 2 million children could be removed from hazardous occupations by the year 2000. Paragraph 42 of the observation of the Committee of Experts highlighted an accumulated non-respect of ILO Conventions on forced labour, child labour and discrimination. It would be appropriate to channel current efforts made to eliminate forced labour and bonded labour in the wider process of eliminating child labour. Faced with the situation of children in bondage in the carpet-weaving industry, for example, what measures could the Government take, faced with internal opposition which claimed that such a system was justified? As for children employed in hazardous occupations, their numbers had been stable for some time, which was worrying. While one welcomed the adoption on 16 January 1995 of an action programme on the identification, release and rehabilitation of children who worked, it was doubtful that this programme was applied very meticulously. However, this problem called for a concrete solution without delay which necessarily had to be accompanied by a major battle against poverty and also by economic development and social progress. With the globalization of the economy, it was up to the international community to work to eliminate child labour. Furthermore, it would be appropriate to reinforce national legal instruments against forced labour, bonded labour, child labour and the sexual exploitation of children, since no economic system in the world justified the fact that children were subjected to such treatment. A child martyr was a child who had had his dignity taken away and for whom death would finally be a release. The boy of 12 years, murdered while he fought for the liberation of thousands of other children in bondage, as he had been himself, was in everyone's mind today. The Committee had the right not only to hope for but to demand concrete results, and very quickly.

The Government representative, after noting the apparent confusion in the minds of many speakers between bonded labour, children in bondage and child labour, read out one particular paragraph from his Government's national policy on child labour. This paragraph read that children often worked on the farm and in the fields, in artisan households, or in small, family-centred trade or service establishments where they most often acquired the skills which enabled them to become fully fledged workers in farming households, family establishments or trades. While work of such kind had its own problems, the Government's policy was to concentrate in those sectors or establishments where children were employed outside the family where their exploitation was most likely to arise. The speaker wished to clarify that the figure of 17 million children, referred to as "child labourers" by the Experts, consisted mostly of children working within family establishments, trades or in the agricultural sector. His Government's perception was that there were very few children in bondage, whereas there was a large number of children who were working while they should be at school. It was also the speaker's view that as his country had already ratified six Conventions relating to child labour, the issue of child labour should be discussed under these Conventions and not so much under Convention No. 29 in view of the existence of very few children in bondage in India.

Moreover, the 2 million children estimated to be engaged in hazardous occupations in the Experts' observation were those children who would receive the Government's attention first. It would then attend to the problems of those who were not in such hazardous employment. Another important point to be clarified was the question as to whether the programmes that were formulated by the central Government were binding on the state Governments. In the subject-matter of labour, both the central and state Governments jointly operated so that while the central Government's legislation had overriding power over the legislation of the state Government, the central Government would normally give the responsibility for implementing the legislation to the state Governments. Therefore, there was a need for tremendous coordination between central and state Governments since the latter would have to help in implementing and monitoring the federal legislation.

Referring to why the National Commission on Bonded Labour, as recommended by the National Commission on Rural Labour, was not being appointed, the speaker indicated that his Government felt that the National Human Rights Commission and the State Human Rights Commissions that might come up very shortly would be able to discharge their duties. However, a committee under the chairmanship of the Labour Minister had already been appointed to look into the need for a national commission on bonded labour and the Government would examine this report as soon as it was available.

Furthermore, while he had not stated that trade unions were not welcome in the process of eliminating child labour, he nevertheless considered that it might not be a workable proposition for this organized structure to take the responsibility of identification, release and rehabilitation of the children concerned. As the Government member of Germany had already pointed out, a lot of work was being done through the IPEC where trade unions were involved, not only in creating awareness but also in making sure that parents got to know of the ill-effects of sending their children to work. The speaker underlined that under the IPEC programme, 55,000 children had been brought out of the world of work into the world of education. Similarly, under the National Child Labour Projects about 15,000 children had left the world of work to join schools and to have some vocational training. He felt that the results were just starting to flow in and that more results would occur as these new large-scale schemes came into operation.

Referring to the concern expressed by certain speakers about the lack of prosecutions and convictions against those employing child workers, it was his view that it was a general investment in education and human resource development that would help to resolve the problem of child labour and not large-scale prosecutions and convictions. In this respect, he indicated that only 12-13 states out of the 32 states and union territories in his country had this problem. This was because the literacy rate in the remaining states was much higher compared to that in those states where there was a problem. For example, in the State of Kerala where the biggest employers were the plantations, children had worked in those plantations earlier on. However, the Plantation Labour Act, which had provided not so much for prosecutions and convictions as it had provided for welfare measures and mandatory provisions for health and education, had most certainly helped in eradicating child labour in those plantations.

Finally, the Government representative assured the Chairman and the Committee members that with regard to the case of Mr. Kailash Sathyarti, an activist of the Bonded Labour Liberation Front of India, this case was filed by an individual exporter who had as much legal right as anybody to let the law of the land take its own course. This had happened on 1 June 1995, and although his Government did not yet have all the facts formally it had been ascertained informally that Mr. Sathyarti had already been released on bail and that the law would take its own course.

The Workers' members thought it necessary to clarify the definitions and distinctions, which could perhaps be requested to the Committee of Experts. Such clarification would also make it possible better to establish the number of children concerned. The number of about 17 million of children working simply in their family business of agricultural or artisan occupations had never before been referred to. The Government representative had also clarified that about 2 million children were employed in dangerous works.

The Workers' members welcomed the assurance made by the Employers' member of India since the employers and their organizations, like the workers' organizations, had an essential role to play. Further efforts must be made to discourage violations. Both the Committee of Experts and this Committee had reason to consider such measures as an indicator of the determination of the Government to solve this problem.

The Employers' members thought that the discussion had more or less confirmed their viewpoint of the beginning. They received with scepticism the indication that no child bonded labour existed, especially because a joint programme of the Government and NGOs was precisely aimed at fighting against this phenomenon. This programme should help to accumulate statistics on the size of that programme.

The efforts for education were no doubt essential but, as the Workers' members pointed out, they could not substitute the effective application of the law. Although India had taken new important programmes in the field of child labour, significant progress could not be observed in the elimination of bonded labour or other forms of work of children. Given the apparent dimensions of the problem, the situation needed to be reversed as an urgent matter.

The Committee took note of the observation of the Committee of Experts and the comprehensive oral and written reports of the Indian Government representative. The Committee recognized the fact that the Government had expressed its readiness to cooperate and had proven this once more by providing the Committee with this information.

The Committee, however, was extremely concerned with regard to the scope and the seriousness of the problem of prohibited child labour, and the Committee considered the problem of child labour as the most important component of the overall problem of bonded labour and forced labour in India. An effective combating of this problem required the identification, release and rehabilitation of the children concerned. The plans and measures for eliminating this evil must, in the mind of the Committee, be considerably extended, strengthened and accelerated. That was particularly true because a serious violation of the fundamental Convention No. 29 had been going on for such a long period of time and because of the enormous number of children concerned. This represented an intolerable situation at the end of the twentieth century.

The Committee therefore urged the Government to improve and strengthen all possible efforts in this direction; in particular the Government at the national level should improve its coordinating activities and its supervisory activities in combating child labour. But, at the same time, the Government, as far as possible, should also make sure that the government authorities were more active at the local level.

The identification, release and rehabilitation of children working in this prohibited employment must, in the opinion of the Committee, be made more effectively and in greater detail and more comprehensively. Therefore, there had to be a greater possibility for sanctioning those responsible.

In the light of the discussion and the conclusions of this Committee over the last few years, and in the light of the inadequate degree of progress which had been made, the Committee was deeply concerned and urged the Government to adopt the measures already mentioned and to use all the resources available to them so that very soon and certainly well before the year 2000 a true degree of progress could be registered.

The Government was also urged to report in detail on all measures taken and any progress made.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1994, Publication: 81st ILC session (1994)

A Government representative stated that his Government had just completed and sent the report requested for the period ending 30 June 1993. He indicated the difficulties that his country faced because of the time required for assembling the information requested by the Committee of Experts. This explained the delay in sending the report. The speaker, referring to the conclusions of the Group of Experts of the Planning Commission, indicated that there had been an appreciable reduction of the number of persons in extreme poverty, notably in the rural areas. In view of the fact that bonded labour resulted from feudal agrarian relations, this should have a direct effect on reducing the incidence of bonded labour. He also pointed out that the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) had accepted the proposition of the Ministry of Labour to gather information on bonded labour in work to be undertaken in 1998-99. The Ministry of Labour has continued to request States to combat bonded labour in all sectors including mining, brick-making, and sectors highlighted by the National Commission of Rural Labour. A committee made up of Secretaries of Labour of five states had submitted a proposal in the form of a report defining bonded labour and ways of measuring it. As to the Vigilance Committees, the speaker cited the number of these organs created at the district and sub-division levels: 50 and 110 in Bihar; 45 and 209 in Madhya Pradesh; 30 and 92 in Rajasthan; 13 and 58 in Orrissa. He also pointed out that in the State of Maharasthra, the Government considered that voluntary organizations tended to exaggerate the situation and that in this State 1,300 of 1,380 bonded labourers had already been rehabilitated. In Tamil Nadu, the Vigilance Committees were being reconstituted and information on the situation in Andhra Pradesh was being collected. His Government had always taken the opinions expressed by the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts very seriously. The Central Government was at present reviewing the matter with state governments and they were formulating suggestions for improving the situation and for accelerating the rehabilitation of bonded labourers. The question of creating a National Commission on Bonded Labour was being examined by a Committee of State Ministers of Labour headed by the Minister of Labour of Maharasthra. His Government maintained, however, that better application of the existing legislation would suffice to eliminate this practice. As concerned the cases launched, and the convictions and measures taken against those found guilty of holding bonded labourers, his Government was concerned that punitive action in this domain could be counter-productive. Such actions might dissuade guilty parties from collaborating with the Government in identifying the existing number of people in bondage. In addition, considering that judicial powers were independent, administrative authorities could not prescribe a time limit for the conclusion of legal procedures. Out of the total of 2,305 cases, 1,031 were acquitted, 1,190 were found guilty and 84 cases were pending. These numbers demonstrated the seriousness with which the Government was attacking the problem. Because of the complexity of the issues involved, the situation could not be resolved only through legal means. The Government was also trying to progressively do away with child labour, and a legal proposal had been elaborated to abolish differential minimum wages for children, adolescents and adults. This move was aimed at dissuading employers from employing children. He also cited figures illustrating the increase, in the course of the last two years, of the number of inspections, and of the prosecutions and convictions which have resulted from the application of the Child Labour Prohibition and Regulation Act. Central Government had requested the states to accord particular importance to the rehabilitation of bonded child labourers and, if and when they were found, to take into consideration information circulated in the press and complaints presented by voluntary organizations and other groups with a view to prompt follow-up action.

The Employers' members noted the number of times this case had been taken up during the last ten years. He regretted that the report of the Government had arrived too late to be examined by the Committee of Experts and thus there was no basis to examine the case concretely in the Conference Committee. The Employers' members did not underestimate the problems of ridding the country of bonded labour and bonded child labour. Nonetheless, for the past ten years they had consistently heard that: (1) there were problems of identification and defining bonded labour; (2) vigilance committees essentially did not exist or were inoperative or were ineffective; (3) there was a whole series of problems associated with the rehabilitation of forced labour; and (4) there was a low number of prosecutions. They deplored the fact that, in spite of all the declarations of good intentions, the situation was not improving. Fifteen requests for information had been made by the Committee of Experts to the Government. This seemed to indicate that the Government regarded the obligation as a purely bureaucratic and routine exercise. The Employers' members stated that bonded labour remained a significant fact of life in India. The problem was serious since it touched between a quarter of a million and 5Ñmillion persons in a country which had ratified the Convention 40Ñyears ago. The actions being undertaken were not very effective. There was, first, a clearly fundamental problem of an ongoing, credible public awareness programme; and second, it was evident, given the dimensions of the problem, that there was not really an effective prosecution and enforcement of laws prohibiting bondage. The Employers' members stated that it was critical that India focus intensely on this problem and, as an urgent matter, do something concrete to end bonded labour and bonded child labour.

The Workers' members agreed with the statement of the Employers that this was an old problem. It was difficult to grasp the problem, because the report requested had not been communicated for examination by the Committee of Experts. Even though a report had now been received, the lateness of its receipt meant it was unavailable as the basis for a discussion by the Conference Committee. They observed that the problem here concerned more than that of child labour. It was every possible type and category of bonded child labour. Virtually every economic sector in India was involved, and all types of abuse of children were practised. The Committee of Experts pointed out that the children are exploited because they were young and defenceless. They have been deprived of a normal childhood, education, a future and perhaps their own lives in certain cases. The Committee of Experts' report noted that the Asian Regional Seminar on Children and Bondage in 1992 concluded that the struggle against child bondage required firm political commitments, a clear and unambiguous statement against bondage, comprehensive national policy, a programme of action covering legislative reforms, effective enforcement and a system of compulsory and free education sustained by community mobilization and information campaigns. In 1993, the Conference Committee was told that the National Child Labour Advisory Committee had begun two national projects for the complete elimination of child labour. The Conference Committee had now been told that there was a bill for an amendment to abolish differential minimum wages legislation for children, adolescents and adults. The Conference Committee had been given no sense that anything was going on. The Committee of Experts was entitled to request information on the implementation of the two national projects. According to the Workers, the Government had pointed out that there was an experiment on economic reform under way which had reduced rural poverty which, in turn, would reduce bonded and child labour. But if the total elimination of poverty in India was required before child labour could be abolished, then child labour would never disappear in India. The Conference Committee was told in June 1993 that there would be statistics on the numbers of bonded and child labour by September 1993. Now the Workers observed that the national sample survey would not treat the subject before 1998. The National Commission on Rural Labour had recommended that there should be a National Commission on Bonded Labour. But the National Human Rights Commission, established in October 1993, was to deal with the issues involved. However, the scope of activity of this Commission was limited to violations of human rights committed by agents of the State. It did not deal with private individuals or companies. The Conference Committee had now been told that the issue was being reconsidered. The Workers' members pointed out that, unless something was done about child labour quickly in India, there may well be an international boycott of Indian goods. They pointed out that in 1993 the Conference Committee urged the Government to provide a detailed report with all necessary information to the Committee of Experts. It was hoped that the question could be taken up again and a report of substantial progress would be made. Earlier discussions referred to the use of the special paragraph, not only for very serious cases but also for continued failure to observe a Convention or where a Government repeatedly ignored the requests made by the Conference Committee. In the present case, it was not only terribly serious, but no progress had occurred and the Government had not submitted the requested information. The Workers requested the Employers to seriously consider joining them in asking that the case be cited in a special paragraph of the Committee's General Report.

The Workers' member from Norway, speaking in the name of workers from Denmark, Finland and Sweden, deplored the attitude of the Government concerning the provision of information requested by the Committee of Experts. He considered that the citation of this case in a special paragraph would be justified for several reasons. In 1992 the Government communicated certain information orally to the Conference Committee. This did not permit the Conference Committee to examine in detail the grave situation of bonded and forced labour, including that of children. This was due to the fact that the information was not communicated in a written form to the Committee of Experts. The Conference Committee requested the Government to send the information required. In 1993, the Conference Committee took note in its conclusions of the fact that the Government had again ignored this request. The situation was repeated again this year, 16 years after the adoption of the law on the abolition of bonded labour. The Committee of Experts had not received the information requested. Such actions justify the citation of this case in a special paragraph.

The Workers' member of Greece stated that a recent report of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions estimated that between 100 and 200Ñmillion child labourers were working in the world. This attested to the negligence of governments concerning this problem. Without totally negating the sincerity of the Government in attacking the problem, the speaker criticized it for consistently not submitting a report, or for submitting it too late for consideration by the Conference Committee. He recalled that according to statistics assembled by twoÑIndian trade unions, several million children between the ages of 3 and 14 were exploited in India. The number of unemployed persons in the country was roughly equivalent to this figure. The speaker noted the possibility, as a concrete measure, to begin a campaign of information to consumers calling for a boycott of products from countries which tolerated these inadmissible practices. Referring to the absence of a response on the part of the Government to questions posed by the Committee of Experts concerning penalties to those responsible for the exploitation of children, notably concerning the ridiculously low level of fines foreseen, the speaker was ready to listen to all explanations the Government might wish to offer on how to remedy this situation. He gave his full support to the proposal of his group to cite the case in a special paragraph.

The Government member of Germany deplored the fact that the report had arrived so late. He conceded nevertheless that a report had in fact been presented and that the Committee of Experts could examine it next year. He pointed out that the Committee of Experts had taken note of the report on the commencement of the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) which pointed out that there had been a change of conscience in central government, state governments and in diverse sectors of society on questions related to child labour. Concerning the proposal to cite the case in a special paragraph, he proposed that, in view of the fact that a report had indeed been sent, this paragraph should deal with India's neglect to send the report requested in a timely manner.

The Workers' member of the United States appreciated the comments of the Government member of Germany, but wished to point out that the problem was more than one of the existence of a report or of timely reporting. There had been a lack of progress on this issue since 1984. The Conference Committee discussed this case in 1986, 1989, 1991, 1992 and 1993. Despite the continuous lack of progress, the case had never been cited in a special paragraph. This was the first time a special paragraph had been proposed.

The Workers' member of Japan pointed out that he was not an expert on bonded labour in India, and he had relied on the report of the Committee of Experts. While he found this case similar to that of Thailand, it was much more serious. The picture painted by the Government member did not respond to reality. The Government had mentioned acts and legislation which were supposed to prohibit bonded labour, but according to the Committee of Experts they were useless or ineffective. There had been little if any progress, and the Vigilance Committees being established at the district and sub-division levels in India were either not constituted or powerless. Punishments had been applied to very few people, and they were meaninglessly small. The Government refused the involvement of trade unions in seeking a solution. The speaker fully supported citing the case in a special paragraph.

The Government representative, in responding to the various interventions, first dealt with the question of child labour, a phenomenon which, in his opinion, did not exist only in developing countries. He cited several examples from developed as well as developing countries from an ILO publication entitled the World Labour Report, published in 1992. While he considered that child labour should be eliminated, this problem had its origins in different economic factors such as the feudal agrarian system, poverty, the deficiencies of the educational system and training. It was a multidimensional problem which necessitated a multidimensional solution. With respect to the considerations expressed by the Employers' members as to the progress made and their worry that the actions taken were limited purely to a bureaucratic exercise, the Government representative reiterated the commitment of his Government to resolving the problems. This was illustrated by the statistics he gave in his preceding intervention concerning prosecutions and convictions against those responsible for forced labour. He insisted that given the size of the problem a solution would require immense effort. This effort, however, must be deployed in a democratic manner, and he underlined the progress that had occurred in the change of conscience concerning the problem on the part of the Government, non-governmental and voluntary organizations and the press. Referring to the intervention of the Workers' members, he reaffirmed his Government's regret for having sent the report late. The Government was committed to complying with the obligations of the supervisory sytem. He reiterated what he had expressed in his preceding intervention concerning the Committee of Ministers of Labour of different States. Their report would permit a better definition of bonded labour and better methods for combating it. In conclusion, the Government representative declared that the question of child labour must not be linked to questions of trade and the imposition of sanctions as this would not contribute to their resolution. The situation must be examined in all of its complexity. Account must be taken of difficulties facing developing countries and the manner in which these countries attempted to face these problems. India has been searching for new avenues to resolve the problems in the areas of education, health and training so as to liberate the children from their state of servitude and reintegrate them in the economic life.

The Employers' members, stating that this was a serious case discussed over a long period of time, praised the very open and forthright position of the Government. However, it was very difficult to engage in dialogue of this kind on the basis of oral information, and that was why they hoped that the Government would not fail to supply its reports on time in the future. But this case was not about reporting: rather, it involved a complicated, intractable problem on which there was little measurable progress. They emphasized that this case concerned forced labour and the Government representative's reference to the subject of child labour in general was a different issue. A new focus needed to be brought to problems of this kind and the Employers thought that a special paragraph might well be the kind of emphasis needed to spur the Government on to renew its efforts to solve this problem more expeditiously.

The Workers' members emphasized that it has not been suggested that the Government's report was deliberately delayed. Noting that the Government had supplied a report on 2 June, which was already an improvement, they pointed out, however, that this Committee never before had an up-to-date report which enabled it to have an effective discussion. They were not accusing India of failing to solve the problem of child labour overnight. The Workers' members wanted to discern some sort of will to act, some feeling that the problem was treated as a matter of priority above all priorities and that some time in the future this would bring about a positive result. Regretfully, the Workers' members, as well as the Employers' members, had not got that feeling. The Workers' members considered that a special paragraph should enable the Government representative to go back to his country to show the urgent concern of this Committee. They hoped that this sense of urgency would be conveyed in the conclusions to be adopted.

The Committee took note of the oral information furnished by the Government representative and of the developments that had taken place. It regretted that no report had been furnished in time by the Government but noted that the report as well as the replies to the comments of the Committee of Experts were received in the International Labour Office on 2 June 1994. It regretted that this late despatch made it impossible for the Committee of Experts, and consequently for the Conference Committee, to consider the most recent information supplied by the Government. In any event, the Committee noted that, notwithstanding the efforts made, much remained to be done to overcome the problems already discussed in the course of the many earlier sessions and highlighted by the Committee of Experts concerning, in particular, the identification, liberation and rehabilitation of persons in bonded labour, including children, as well as, in particular, the introduction of an efficient enforcement system. In this regard, the Committee remained very deeply concerned by the situation. The Committee firmly invited the Government to send its next report on time so that it could be examined by the Committee of Experts, as well as the Conference Committee. Considering the conclusions it adopted last year and bearing in mind the gravity of the questions which had been discussed for several years now without any progress being recorded, the Committee reiterated its very deep concern. It urged the Government not to spare any efforts to institute the urgent and necessary measures for the elimination of debt bondage and to furnish without delay and without fail all the detailed information required by the Committee of Experts. The Committee decided to include its conclusions in a special paragraph of its report.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1993, Publication: 80th ILC session (1993)

A Government representative stated that a high level of awareness already existed in India about the problem of bonded labour and the Government was making every possible effort to eradicate it. He recalled that two centuries of continuous and perpetual economic exploitation had made India a land of poverty and famine. The awakening against this bondage had only occurred quite recently, after independence. The country had conquered the famine and it was only a question of time before it also conquered the bondage. He was confident that as his country's economic strength increased, debt bondage would disappear. The will of the Government and of the people to eradicate this problem could be seen in the existence of legislative provisions banning debt bondage, the effective follow-up to executive action, judicial remedies, the discussion in Parliament and in state legislatures, the adequate publicity given by the media, and the voluntary agencies active in this field. He recalled that comprehensive legislation had been adopted in 1976 through the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act which extinguished the liabilities of bonded labourers and made offences punishable. Bonded labour was not only prohibited by the Constitution and specific legislation, but was also combated administratively by the executive apparatus of both the central and state Governments. Administrative action consisted of three stages: identification, release and rehabilitation. The central Government continued to advise the state Governments to conduct periodic surveys for the identification of bonded labourers and to take steps for their release and rehabilitation. They have also been advised to involve voluntary agencies and social action groups in this task. Identification and release of bonded labourers were not sufficient however. The Government, therefore, provided three types of rehabilitation grants: land-based, non-land-based and skill-craft-based. Furthermore, vigilance committees had been set up in districts and subdivisions of states in order to enforce properly the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act. These committees periodically reviewed their work which was, in turn, also monitored. The Government would approach the ILO in the near future in order to improve this monitoring mechanism. He indicated that 256,000 bonded labourers had been identified and 233,000 had been rehabilitated. It was, therefore, not appropriate to conclude that there was no effective enforcement of the Act. Criminal prosecution had to be based on due process of law and could not be done within artificially set time-limits. The National Commission on Rural Labour submitted its report in July 1991 and the recommendations were forwarded to the ministries and departments of the central Government for examination in consultation with state Governments. State Governments were also provided with copies for examination and implementation. The progress was reviewed periodically. He noted that a meeting had been held by the Union Minister of State for Labour with the labour secretaries from the states where the problem of bonded labour was endemic. It was concluded that a new survey of labour should be carried out in those states. The states should endeavour to complete the surveys by September 1993. A Committee of State Labour Secretaries was constituted to recommend a workable definition of bonded labour to be used for the survey, taking into account the judicial pronouncements in this regard. To ensure the release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, states had been advised to integrate the various anti-poverty schemes (e.g. the Integrated Rural Development Programme and Jawahar Rozgar Yojna). In the activities undertaken under the special component plans for SC/ST, arrangements existed for the allotment of surplus land to the free bonded labourers. Assistance was also provided in the form of non-land assets and the Act provided for restoration of the property of bonded labourers after their release, free from encumbrances. Vigilance committees and voluntary agencies were involved in the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. The involvement of trade unions in this process might prove to be unworkable as they were in the organized sector and most bonded labourers were found in the unorganized sector. Furthermore, it would be difficult for freed bonded labourers to organize themselves into a voluntary agency for the implementation of rehabilitation schemes as they preferred to settle in their own villages and were scattered all over the country.

As concerned the proposed Commission on Human Rights, the Government did not need to entrust any specific subjects to it as the proposed Commission would have the freedom to go into any issue which, in its opinion, infringed human rights.

With respect to the question of child labour, he stated that nine national child labour projects, including a major component on special schools, had been set up under the Action Plan to implement the National Child Labour Policy of 1987. In 1993, the National Child Labour Advisory Board had identified two national projects for the complete elimination of child labour in one year. Referring to the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC), he indicated that the Government had signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the ILO in May 1992. Fifty-six projects had been approved by the tripartite National Steering Committee, 34 of which were already being implemented. One of the largest projects was for the training of inspectors which would be carried out at the National Labour Institute and four Regional Labour Training Institutes during 1993 and would cover about 600 inspectors.

As concerned the amendments which the Committee of Experts had requested be made to the Nagaland (Requisition of Porters) Act, 1965, he pointed out that, since the recent Assembly elections in Nagaland, the matter had been taken up once again, on a priority basis, at the highest level with the Chief Minister of the Government of Nagaland.

Finally, with respect to the statistical data requested by the Committee of Experts, he indicated that data on the discharge of personnel in the Navy was now available, but data concerning the Army was difficult to collect. The Defence Services Regulations requested could not be provided to the ILO as these were meant only for official use.

The Employers' members thanked the Government representative for the detailed information provided and recalled that this case had been discussed in this Committee for a number of years. The problem was an enormous one. Bonded labour had existed traditionally in India and was prohibited by legislation 15 years ago. The very old system of bonded labour was, however, difficult to eradicate in practice. In this regard, they recalled that the Committee of Experts indicated in its comments that no significant improvement had been made in the situation. They pointed out that the discrepancy between the estimates of the number of bonded labourers was tremendous. Figures varied from 250,000 to 5,000,000. The individual states were better placed to make these estimates than the national Government, but this division of responsibilities did not seem to be very successful. This was also a problem with respect to the vigilance committees. The Government did not receive any reports from these committees and it appeared that they might not be functioning properly. If this was true, measures needed to be taken. While voluntary agencies were active in the rehabilitation and reintegration into society of former bonded labourers, the reports of the National Commission on Rural Labour indicated that there had been little success in rehabilitation and that measures had to be taken to improve the situation. They noted the Committee of Experts' call for more voluntary agencies to be involved in rehabilitation activities and requested the Government to indicate whether new agencies did exist and what their impact was. They noted that the Government, while indicating its preparedness to observe the developments in the situation, had rejected the idea of creating a national committee to deal with bonded labour. They noted that there was a Bill to establish a Commission on Human Rights, but were not clear as to whether this Commission would be responsible for the question of bonded labour. They queried the Government as to the powers of this Commission and recalled that bonded labour could only be effectively combated when the necessary action was planned and implemented.

As concerned child bonded labour, they noted the information provided by the Government representative concerning the creation of two national programmes. If these programmes had actually been already set up, how were they being implemented in practice? According to a United Nations document, a very large number of children were affected by bonded labour. They requested the Government to provide further information to the Office on the results of the fact-finding committee appointed by the Supreme Court. Child labour was a sign of a high degree of poverty in a country. This problem was not restricted to India, as could be seen by the convening of the Asian Regional Seminar on Children in Bondage. This particular case, however, was a question of ensuring in practice what had already been provided in legislation. The measures already taken were not satisfactory and needed to be strengthened. Stronger measures should come at the federal level, and if this was not possible with the present division of responsibility, then perhaps the division should be reviewed. Despite the Government representative's assurances that the problem would be dealt with, very little progress could be noted up to now. They requested the Government to provide detailed information to the Office on any changes made (which were so urgently required) so as to ensure the eradication of bonded labour in practice.

The Workers' members noted that this was one of the most difficult and intractable problems which this Committee had to discuss this year. They noted that the Government had not supplied a report in 1992 and 1993 for examination by the Committee of Experts and stressed that this information was essential to the adequate handling of this case by the Committee of Experts and this Committee. They lamented the lack of progress made since the adoption of legislation to abolish bonded labour and the landmark Supreme Court decision. The process of identification of bonded labourers was slow, the rehabilitation measures were inadequate, the constitution and functioning of vigilance committees fell far short of what was required, the involvement of voluntary agencies in official rehabilitation schemes was almost non-existent, prosecutions were few and the penalties imposed were ludicrous. It was true that legislation for the abolition of bonded labour existed, but the magnitude of the problem had to be established before effective policies to tackle it could be adopted. As the Employers' members had indicated, the estimates of the number of bonded labourers varied extraordinarily. They had doubts about the latest figures provided by the Government which indicated that there were only 30,000 bonded labourers left. While the Government indicated that they were undertaking new surveys to determine the number of bonded labourers, the Workers' members recalled that the Government had been saying this since 1985, still without results. In its report, the National Commission on Rural Labour had indicated that the definition of bonded labour adopted by the National Sample Survey Organization doing the statistical investigation was far too restricted. The Committee of Experts had expressed the hope that the Government would take into consideration the full definition of bonded labour in any instructions issued. The Workers' members noted, however, that the human resources available in India should have been sufficient to undertake more adequately a sound statistical investigation. As concerned the vigilance committees, the National Commission on Rural Labour had indicated that most of these committees had not been constituted and those which had been set up were inactive. Monitoring of these committees' work was essential. They requested the Government to indicate the steps taken to monitor the vigilance committees. They queried what effective rehabilitation action could be taken when the areas where bonded labour was found were characterized by economic backwardness, poor infrastructure and low employment. They urged the Government to provide information to the Office for examination on the action taken to stimulate involvement of voluntary agencies in rehabilitation activities as recommended by the National Commission on Rural Labour.

While they welcomed the steps taken to adopt a Bill establishing a Commission on Human Rights, they noted that the major problem at present was bonded labour. It was not at all clear that the Commission on Human Rights was going to deal with this problem. As concerned the enforcement of sanctions, the Workers' members noted the references in the report of the National Commission on Rural Labour to inordinate time-lags between identification, release and rehabilitation and the lack of prosecutions for violation of the Act.

Referring to the tragedy of child labour in India, the Workers' members were dubious about the Government representative's statement that this would be eradicated within one year.

Finally, the Workers' members noted that it was impossible to ask all the questions which needed to be asked in the short time available. This case represented one of the most serious violations of this Convention and its application in India would have to be kept under constant and regular review. The efforts made by the Government were inadequate and the results dissatisfying. The case would have to be reviewed by the Committee in the future and they hoped that the Government would provide the Office with the reports necessary for proper examination. In the future, this case might require special treatment in order to express the dissatisfaction with the manner in which it was being handled.

The Workers' member of Pakistan stated his conviction that bonded labour, and particularly child labour, was an evil not only to India but to all humanity. In this context, he welcomed the creation of the National Commission on Rural Labour. Special measures were required in order to free bonded labourers who typically came from Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and were often illiterate and landless. The Government should pay special attention to this segment of society and facilitate their access to gainful employment. The anti-poverty schemes described by the Government should be more directed to this problem. He urged the Government to implement the recommendation of the National Commission on Rural Labour to establish a national authority or national commission on bonded labour. He also urged the Government to supply a copy of the Supreme Court judgement requested in the comments of the Committee of Experts. He welcomed the recommendations of the Asian Regional Seminar on Children in Bondage and hoped that the governments involved would, in the coming years, allocate resources for the education and training of children and provide gainful employment to the poor segments of society, particularly those involved in rural labour, so that the evil of bonded labour could be eradicated. Finally, he expressed the hope that the IPEC programme would help member States tackle this problem and strengthen the measures needed for the elimination of bonded labour.

The Workers' member of New Zealand, associating himself with the comments of the Workers' members, noted that the neutral and dispassionate language of the Committee of Experts could not hide the tragedy underlying this case. The report of the Asian Regional Seminar on Children in Bondage had referred to bonded children as the most lonely, vulnerable, tragic workers of the world. While the difficulties faced by the Government in trying to eradicate this evil were great, he requested the Government to indicate the measures taken in response to the recommendations made at the Asian Regional Seminar, particularly as concerned the creation of a comprehensive national policy and programme of action covering legislative reforms, effective enforcement and a system of compulsory and free education, sustained by community mobilization and information campaigns.

The Workers' member of Colombia pointed out that, while the Government had ratified the Convention 39 years ago, it was still at the stage of taking measures. Although the information provided was full of optimism, unfortunately the workers and particularly the children subjected to forced labour and slavery were not of the same opinion. This Committee was constantly being told by a majority of countries that studies were being made, that measures were being taken and that the Government would take appropriate action. The only thing one could note in practice, however, was the persistence of the problems. He stated that, unfortunately, this was a case which affected millions of victims. Yet again, one could see the profound social imbalance reigning over humanity. Naturally, the highest price was paid by the poorest and most marginalized sectors who saw not only their rights denied, but also their hopes. Finally, while he agreed that the Government of India should muster all its enthusiasm, patriotic fervour and sensitivities to solve this problem, he added that the industrialized countries and those countries with a higher economic capacity needed to revise their policies with a view to ensuring a fairer distribution of world income, as this would solve many of the problems arising in the world. It was necessary that all the forces in India concerned themselves not only with the most privileged, but rather principally with the poorest of their country.

The Government member of Germany, restricting his comments to child bonded labour, stated that there were certain signs of progress in this case. While agreeing that the overall situation was quite depressing, he recalled that India was one of the main target countries for the ILO's International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC). As a member of the Steering Committee, he wished to point out that the Indian Government was making enormous efforts to deal with the problem of child bonded labour. A great deal of critical attention had been given to this problem by the Vice-President of India in his statement at the opening of the Conference on Safety and Health in New Delhi. While such self-criticism did not solve the problem, it was encouraging and the Government should be encouraged to continue along these lines so that the situation could finally change.

The Government representative, after indicating his gratitude for the views expressed, clarified that the one-year plan for the elimination of child labour was not intended to eradicate all child labour, but concerned two project areas identified for administrative and logistical convenience. As concerned the non-supply of reports, he stated that it was very difficult to obtain information relating to the vigilance committees. Already more than 400 vigilance committees existed and more would have to be created after the survey was completed. For this reason, the Government was approaching the ILO for technical cooperation in the field of monitoring. He concluded by indicating that the various comments made in this Committee would be taken into account and reiterated that his Government was very serious about addressing the problem of bonded labour and especially the problem of child labour.

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative. The Committee observed that more than 15 years had elapsed since the abolition in law of the bonded labour system in 1976. It noted, however, that, as was stated by the Committee of Experts, this serious situation had, since then, improved very little in practice: the process of identification was slow, rehabilitation measures were inadequate, the constitution and functioning of vigilance committees left much to be desired and were not monitored by a national body, the involvement of voluntary agencies in official rehabilitation schemes was not being encouraged, prosecutions were rare and penalties imposed even rarer. The Committee noted that the National Commission on Rural Labour in a report published in 1991 pointed to the shortcomings and made a number of proposals and recommendations. The Committee also recalled the comments of the Committee of Experts over recent years with regard to the very serious situation of bonded child labour, as well as the discussions that had taken place on this matter. It noted with interest the technical cooperation agreement concluded with the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour. The Committee expressed its deep concern and urged the Government to provide a detailed report, with all the necessary information, for examination by the Committee of Experts at its next session. In view of the seriousness of the situation and the slowness of the progress made since 1976, the Committee expressed the firm hope that it would be able to take this case up again next year and that it would be able to note substantial progress towards the elimination of bonded labour.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1992, Publication: 79th ILC session (1992)

The Government communicated the following information:

Identification of bonded labourers

The identification of bonded labourers is mainly undertaken by the Revenue Department and the Block Development Officer of the state governments. The Labour Ministry has issued circular instructions highlighting the need for undertaking fresh efforts for identification. It suggests the following steps:

(a) household surveys should be conducted by the Revenue Department with the help of field agencies like the Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Zonal Directorate of Backward Classes' Welfare and similar agencies on the lines of the survey drawn up by the National Sample Survey Organisation in their 32nd round;

(b) identification should be done during censuses conducted for the allotment of house sites under the IRDP;

(c) intensive studies should be undertaken in stone quarries and brick kilns.

The release of a bonded labourer is a judicial process. The procedure for releasing a bonded labourer has been laid down in section 21 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. The procedure envisages a summary inquiry as provided under the Criminal Procedure Code. After the inquiry is completed, the keeper of the bonded labourer can be punished and the bonded labourer has to be freed, liquidating all his debts and liabilities vis-à-vis the employer. If the offence of keeping a bonded labourer is proven, punishment is mandatory according to section 16 of the Act.

Vigilance committees

The vigilance committees are set up by the state governments in almost all the districts and subdivisions where the problem of bonded labour is endemic. These committees hold periodic meetings to review the implementation of the Act and to assist the authorities for identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourer and also to guide the implementing authorities.

Integration of the bonded labour scheme with other anti-poverty schemes

The need to integrate the efforts being made under the scheme of rehabilitation of bonded labourers with other ongoing beneficiary-oriented anti-poverty programmes has been stressed by the state governments from time to time. The state governments in turn have issued directions to their implementing agencies to take suitable measures to integrate the scheme of rehabilitation with other ongoing beneficiary-oriented anti-poverty programmes being implemented.

National Commission on Bonded Labour

The entire matter of setting up the National Commission on Bonded Labour was examined in detail by the Ministry of Labour in the light of the recommendation of the National Commission on Rural Labour. It has been decided that the setting up of another commission is not necessary at this stage. It was felt that what is required is better implementation of the provisions of the Act by the state governments which should be closely monitored each month. In view of this, the chief secretaries of all concerned state governments have been addressed by the Union Labour Secretary in the matter of taking vigorous steps for the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers on 7 February 1992. A system of quarterly monitoring has been introduced.

The Labour Minister's directive to the state governments to avoid corruption and misappropriation of funds in the process of the identification and freeing of bonded labour

Labour as a subject forms part of the Concurrent List in the Constitution of India which implies that the union Government and the state governments have joint responsibility in the formulation of labour policy and legislation. In view of this constitutional provision, a large number of labour laws are enacted by the central Government but are enforced by the state governments. This arrangement exists for the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. For better implementation of this and other similar labour laws, the Government advises the state governments from time to time.

Child labour

The Government has initiated orientation-cum-training courses to motivate and sensitise enforcement staff to interact with them about the problems of child labour, the need to strictly enforce the labour laws relating to child labour and also to have a special approach to the problem as a whole. It is proposed to expand this programme not only to include the enforcement machinery but also the NGOs, the community at large, the workers' and the employers' groups. In fact, two state-level tripartite workshops have been held in the states of Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh involving the Government, the employers' group and the workers' group to draw up a comprehensive action plan not only to integrate the welfare inputs but also to have a coordinated effort by all social partners involved in the task of the elimination of child labour. The Government has also initiated active consultation with the employers' and workers' groups separately to discuss the problems being faced in the implementation of the law and to find out ways and means of improving the situation especially with reference to the role that the employers' and workers' groups play in this regard.

Regarding the Committee's comment in respect of the writ petition (Civil) Case No. 12125 of 1984, it is still sub judice. It may be mentioned that the fact-finding committee was appointed by the order of the Supreme Court, and has since submitted their report to them. As soon as the Court's decision is obtained, further information will be provided to the Committee.

The Government has also supplied the statistics on the bonded labourers identified and rehabilitated as at 31 March 1991 and the target fixed for 1991-92 on the number of prosecutions launched under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, as at March 1988, and extracts taken from the Supreme Court's judgement dated 16 December 1983 in Bandhua Mkuti Morcho v. Union of India and others.

In addition, a Government representative, referring to the written information provided by the Government, indicated that the central Government had not sent a report on the Convention because of difficulties in the collection of information from various state governments. The central Government cannot fulfil also the request of the Committee of Experts to provide full information on the findings and recommendations of a committee formed pursuant to the Supreme Court's judgement of 1983, as the central Government had not received it from the state Government of Haryana, but the following information may be useful for the Committee to assess the following action which has been taken. The Supreme Court's judgement of 1983 gave a very broad and liberal interpretation of the definition of the term "bonded labour" system; this has been brought to the notice of the state governments and to the district authorities; and the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act of 1976 was amended accordingly in 1985. The statistics which have been made available by the state government of Haryana show that there have been 544 identified cases of bonded labour as of March 1991; only 21 cases out of them have been rehabilitated but the state government is taking the necessary follow-up measures in the rest of the cases. According to the latest statistics as of 31 March 1991, the total number of identified bonded labourers is 255,608, out of which 222,985 have been rehabilitated. In order to accelerate the process of identification, the central Government has issued instructions to the various state governments highlighting the need for undertaking from time to time fresh efforts for identification of these cases, like the household surveys are conducted by the revenue departments, and the development departments at the grass-root level, and various statistics-collecting machinery, as well as surveys done by the National Sample Survey Organisation. These bodies have also been advised to take up intensive studies in stone quarries and brick kilns. Regarding the vigilance committees, the speaker confirmed that they are set up by the state governments almost at every district and subdivisional level where the problem of bonded labour is endemic. These committees have been holding periodic meetings to review the implementation of the above-mentioned Act and assisting the authorities in identifying, in releasing and in rehabilitating bonded labour. However, it is not always possible for the central Government to go into the details of the workings of the vigilance committees, this work being done by the state governments. On the question of involvement of voluntary agencies, she indicated that they are paid managerial subsidies to conduct their work on the basis of 50 per cent grants at 5,000 rupees per annum as a matching grant. In addition, they are also paid a certain amount for each release order in excess of a limit which is given on a year-to-year basis. So far there have been four voluntary agencies which have been subsidised by different state governments, but there are other voluntary agencies which may not be taking the help of the Government but still contributing to this process in their own way. According to the information collected from the state governments, no new surveys have been undertaken by them but they were instructed to consider the possibility of vesting the necessary powers with the grass-root district administration to facilitate this task.

On the question of the integration of the various anti-poverty development programmes which the Government started a number of years ago, it had been advising all state governments to try to build up such integration and linkages so that there is the least chance of the bonded labourers, once released, to revert back to that status.

As regards the proposal for the institution of a national commission on bonded labour, the Government has examined it and decided that the setting up of another commission is not necessary at this stage; what is required is a better implementation of the provisions of the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act by the state governments and a system of quarterly monitoring has been introduced to that end.

On the issue of child labour, she stated that her country has constitutional and legislative provisions prohibiting child labour in certain hazardous occupations/processes and regulating their conditions of work in other employments. A national policy on child labour was also formulated in 1987 covering the welfare aspect of child labour. It is further proposed to expand this programme to include not only enforcement machinery but also the NGOs, the community at large, and the workers' and employers' organisations, with which consultations were initiated to discuss their contribution towards elimination of child labour. The speaker also referred to an extensive collaboration with UNICEF in this area and to the obligations which the international community, and not only the central Government, has in moving towards elimination of child labour. Under the international programme for the elimination of child labour initiated by the ILO, India would be taking up the programmes involving the NGOs in a number of areas and categories of employment, the training of the inspectorate, and intends to initiate a massive awareness campaign within the country. The Committee of Experts has also drawn attention to the report of the fact-finding committee appointed by Order of the Supreme Court in 1991 on a particular case before it. As soon as the Court's decision is obtained, the Government will provide further information to the Committee of Experts.

The Workers' members thanked the Government representative for the considerable amount of information provided but expressed their disappointment to the extent that much of this information could have been supplied to the Committee of Experts earlier, so that the present Committee could base its conclusions on the evaluation of the situation by the Experts. They considered, however, that on the point raised by the Committee of Experts concerning the Supreme Court's judgement of 1983 and the committee to investigate the issue of identifying bonded labourers in the State of Haryana, the Government should provide full details as required by the Experts and not excuse itself by invoking the fact that the matter is sub judice and the information is therefore not available. On the question concerning the identification, freeing and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, the Experts refer to the information submitted by Anti-Slavery International that debt bondage affected almost 5 million adults and 10 million children in India. The figures provided by the Government in this respect seem to be peculiarly constant: 242,000 bonded labourers in 1989, 245,000 in 1990, and now, as at 31 March 1991, the figure is given at 255,608. If such precise figures can be obtained there appears to be a highly developed system of collecting statistics and still the central Government points to the difficulties it has in getting information from the various states. It is important to provide statistics in order that this Committee may assess the efforts being made by the Government to deal with the obligations under this Convention. It is equaly important, as the Committee of Experts point out, to involve trade unions, social partners, and many other organisations in the work that needs to be undertaken in this case. This concerns the problem of the identification of bonded labour and the role of the vigilance committees in this respect; noting the importance of their role, the Experts asked the Government to ensure that the vigilance committees are constituted, have regular meetings and maintai registers. The Workers expressed their disappointment with the written information provided by the Government in this respect to the extent that it seems that the central Government is not able to monitor the work of the vigilance committees and is almost throwing up its hands in despair. Also there was not much information about the involvement of voluntary agencies and on the schemes for rehabilitation. The Workers' members requested the Government to provide the Committee of Experts with the information it has requested on how many agencies were contacted and their response, concerning the categories of activities in which released bonded labourers are rehabilitated and the mechanisms which exist for the follow-up of rehabilitation measures, as well as on any action plans adopted to promote the integration of bonded labour schemes and other anti-poverty schemes. Concerning the decision not to institute a national commission on bonded labour, the Workers' members could understand this if this commission would be nothing but another bureaucratic measure, but thought that such a commission might conceivably be used to coordinate all the various activities referred to by the Government. They suggested that all the arguments and recommendations in this respect should be presented to the Committee of Experts so that it can see whether the abolition of this initiative is a good thing. One particularly important area is the enforcement of the law and the Government should once again, as requested by the Experts, provide detailed information on the actions brought before the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts of the different states concerning bonded labour. The Government perhaps could be asked to speed up the process of the consideration of some of these cases by the judiciary. In view of the horrifying facts on the use of child labour referred to in the report and recognising that Western countries had their share of responsibility in the economic exploitation of Indian children, the Workers' members believed that pressure should be kept up on the Indian Government in order to ensure that there continues to be the maximum effort made to bring to an end bonded labour and child labour in the subcontinent. The Conference Committee should encourage, indeed by sometimes criticising the Government, the active assistance of all the machinery of the ILO to help it in its work. It must continue to examine all the aspects of this problem and so must the Committee of Experts. In conclusion, they once again invited the Government to supply future reports to the ILO in order to facilitate the work of the supervisory bodies.

The Employers' members observed that reading the seven pages of the Committee of Experts' report this year and the written reply of the Government, and in listening to the declaration of the Government representative today, one had the impression that the problem is being resolved. This is not the case. This impression in this year's Experts' report described the situation in much more vivid terms and this year the Experts basically limited themselves to making 11 information requests to the Government which do not reflect the reality of the problem. There are in fact two problems - bonded labour and child labour - two subjects which give rise to a very deep concern. Obviously, there are laws which deal with these two questions, but the problem is the one of application. The penal sanctions are in the text but it seems that the exploiters of bonded labour and child labour really have nothing to fear because of the slowness of the judiciary process. One of the essential difficulties comes from the fact that the real dimensions of the problem are not known: partly it concerns the problem of the identification of bonded labourers but also it may go to what in fact is the definition of bonded labour. Numerous statistics were supplied but his Committee does not know whether the figure of approximately 250,000 persons is exact, whether it is higher or lower. The speaker said that he was inclined to consider it to be higher. This year's report does not give the impression that there are still difficulties with the vigilance committees. The Government said that they all have been set up and that it is assumed that they are operating well; however, last year's report indicated that a large number of these committees had not been set up and some of them do not seem to work very well. The Government should increase its efforts in respect of these committees which are one of the key instruments it uses to solve the problem. The Government representative stated that it has no way of assessing the effectiveness of these committees, but it is not enough for a federal State to say that a given subject comes under the responsibility of the constituent states; it has to incite them to supply the requested information in order that the Experts and this Committee can examine whether the mechanisms used to remedy the situation are in fact efficient. One key part of the remedy to the problem of bonded labour is the integration of the rehabilitation schemes with other anti-poverty schemes; the Government should not just issue instructions in this respect but take other measures to push the process along. Last year's report indicated that this rehabilitation process has been delayed and that some freed labourers have fallen back into bondage because subsistence allowances which they received have not been high enough. As they did last year, the Employers' members invited the federal Government to reconsider its strategy consisting in withholding financing from states if they did not increase their efforts, because this resulted in denying help to the very persons that needed it most. The laws exist also in respect of child labour but they do not seem to be rigorously applied in practice. The gravity and the dimensions of the problem were well described in the report of the Committee of Experts. The measures mentioned by the Government representative are a step in the right direction, but once again the exploiters of child labour as well as bonded labour do not seem to have much to fear from the sanctions because of the slowness of the judicial process. The Committee must pursue its efforts to combat this problem step by step hoping that it may be resolved soon.

The Government representative stressed that the Government of India is equally, if not more deeply, concerned with both the issues of child labour and bonded labour. She said that the judiciary process was slow at times and that in respect of the vigilance committees it is very difficult for the central Government to collect the information. The Government decided to strengthen its implementation procedures through a quarterly monitoring system. She clarified that the decision of not instituting a national commission on bonded labour has been a conscious decision of the Government - taking all points under consideration should take care of the apprehensions expressed by the Workers. Regarding child labour it set up a task force to go into the various aspects of its problem and the central Government, in cooperation with the states, is actively engaged to fill in the loopholes in the legislation and to ensure that the minimum penalties imposed by the law are also given effect to by the honourable courts. An informal dialogue with the judiciary is also envisaged to find out ways and means of strengthening the implementation of the Act. In conclusion, the Government representative reiterated her Government's commitment to comply with the Committee of Experts' comments and the conclusions of the Conference Committee.

The Committee took note of the information given by the Government. It regretted that the detailed oral information provided had not been contained in a written report sent to the Committee of Experts. Regrettably, under these circumstances, the Committee could not fully assess the situation in particular as concerns the abolition of bonded labour. It firmly hoped that the Government would supply full particulars on the different points raised by the Committee of Experts at its earliest convenience so that the Conference Committee could make a thorough assessment at one of its next sessions.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1991, Publication: 78th ILC session (1991)

The Government has communicated the following information:

Identification, freeing and rehabilitation of bonded labourers

Although the amendment made in 1985 to the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, was aimed at a speedier identification of bonded labourers, the numbers of bonded labourers had been estimated differently in different surveys. Thus, the estimates made in 1981 by the Gandhi Peace Foundation in cooperation with the National Labour Institute in regard to the existence of 2.6 million bonded labourers in agriculture alone has not been accepted by the Government. In particular, the surveys suggested only the estimates and not the actual number; the methodology adopted by the Gandhi Peace Foundation and other organisations was technically unsound. The sample was not adequately representative and more reliance was put on extrapolations than was justified. The State Governments are primarily responsible for indentification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. They ensure that the Vigilance Committees are constituted and that they hold regular meetings and see that registers, etc., required to be maintained under Rule 7 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Rules, 1976, are maintained and kept properly. Moreover, they have been advised to conduct surveys to that all bonded labourers are identified as early as possible. On 31 March 1989, 242,532 bonded labourers had been identified by the State Governments.

Referring to freeing from bonded debt and rehabilitation, it may be noted that no target number is fixed. Any person who is forced into state of bondage has to be freed and rehabilitated. As regards rehabilitation, the generally accepted principle that is being followed is that the entire backlog of bonded labour should be rehabilitated by the end of March 1990.

There is a centrally sponsored scheme for rehabilitation of bonded labourers. A sum of Rs.6,250 is to be spent for rehabilitation of each bonded labourer. The expenditure on the scheme is shared on a fifty/fifty basis by the Central Government and the State Governments. Out of Rs.6,250 (up to 31 January 1986, this amount was Rs.4000), Rs.500 is meant to be given to the released bonded labourer in kind for consumption soon after his release to enable him to tide over the period till his rehabilitation. The quality of rehabilitation also is extremely important. Instructions have been issued by the Central Governement to the State Governments that the centrally sponsored scheme for rehabilitation of bonded labourers should be integrated with other anti-poverty programmes. The centrally sponsored scheme, apart from seeking integration with other anti-poverty alleviation programmes, envisages either land-based pattern of assistance or the non-land-based schemes. Targets for rehabilitation are being set on the basis of the number of bonded labourers.

Enforcement of sanctions

The penalties prescribed under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, appear quite adequate to deal with the offenders. The Government has taken serious note that there have been far too few cases of prosecution under the above Act. The Government has also in recent years come across cases where persons other than bonded labourers were also identified and declared bonded to obtain central grants. It was in recognition of these facts that the Union Labour Minister has written to all State Governments emphasising the need of launching prosecution against the bonded labour keepers immediately after a bonded labourer is identified and released. The Central Government has made it clear that if a fresh identification of a bonded labourer is not accompanied by the launching of prosecution against the bonded labour keeper, the Central Government may not release its share of money for rehabilitation of bonded labourers. It has also been impressed upon the State Governments to constitute Vigilance Committees in all those districts and subdivisions where they have not been constituted and to see that the Committee should hold regular meetings as required by the Act.

In addition, a Government representative referred to the written information supplied by her Government and pointed out that, due to the late receipt of the Committee of Experts' report, it had not been possible to give full information on all the points raised therein.

Regarding the scope of the legislation, she stated that, pursuant to the Supreme Court's judgement of 16 December 1983, the Government of Haryana had constituted a committee to investigate the issue of identifying bonded labourers; it was in the process of finalising its report for submission to the Supreme Court. The information regarding further developments on this point would be submitted to the Committee of Experts in due course.

On the second point in the observation, she repeated that her Government did not accept the results of the survey on account of the reasons communicated earlier.

Regarding the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, she stated that vigilance committees had been constituted in almost every State at the district and subdivisional level; those already set up were advising the district of subdivisional magistrates and were making efforts to identify, release and rehabilitate bonded labourers. Her Government had not received any information from these committees or the State Governments regarding problems encountered in the identification and rehabilitation process. Her Government had also not taken any specific steps for providing incentives to the vigilance committees, nor had it received any proposals as yet from the State Governments on this. No further studies or surveys in this regard had been carried out. However, as and when complaints were received regarding the existence of bonded labourers, inquiries were made to ascertain the nature or existence of such a system and steps taken to release and rehabilitate the labourers involved.

As for the involvement of voluntary agencies, she stated that so far there had been two cases of voluntary agencies who had come forward to claim the managerial subsidy for the year 1989-90. However, when such voluntary agencies brought to the notice of the Government the existence of bonded labourers in an area they covered, efforts were made to obtain the release of the persons involved and to rehabilitate them suitably.

She pointed out that State Governments had been requested time and again to rehabilitate bonded labourers with further assistance from the various anti-poverty schemes. No plans had yet been drawn up to promote the integration of the rehabilitation scheme with other anti-poverty schemes, since that involved a major decision to transfer the subject of bonded labour to another department, that is the Department of Rural Development. However, with the proposed National Commission on Bonded Labour, a view might emerge to integrate the two types of schemes for better results.

As for the proposed institution of a National Commission on Bonded Labour, it was still under government consideration; a final decision was likely in the next few months.

Regarding the penalties prescribed under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, she repeated that her Government believed that the penalties were quite adequate to deal with offenders. She referred to her Government's statement showing the number of persons arrested and the nature of punishments imposed in the implementation of the 1976 Act and hoped that the Committee of Experts would take due note thereof.

The Workers' members thanked the Government representative for her statement and for the very full written report contained in the document communicated by the Government. The problem was, however, that there was so much information given, much of which conflicted with the detailed information received from other organisations. It had to be accepted that there was some controversy as to who was a bonded labourer under the Act: there were divergent estimates of the numbers involved. While understanding the Government's arguments concerning the figures, which were more for statisticians, the Workers' members believed that the real difficulty was that the Government itself was not completely aware of the number of people involved because of the extraordinary difficulties in determining the precise figure. They remained somewhat skeptical over the detailed figures provided by the Government. As for the vigilance committees, the Workers' members were concerned that they had not been set up or, where they had, were not meeting regularly. Such committees were of considerable importance in providing economic and social rehabilitation to bonded labourers, in coordinating the functions of rural banks and cooperatives, and in keeping registers on the benefits received by freed labourers. Therefore, while accepting the Government's assurances, the Workers agreed that the Committee of Experts should be kept informed on this point. They considered that voluntary agencies had an important part to play and felt that if the resources available to them were in any way limited, this would be an obstacle to their necessary participation in the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. They were not clear about the amount of rupees given to bonded labourers on their release: the report mentioned Rs. 6,250, of which only Rs. 500 were actually given to the labourer himself. Such an amount had often proved insufficient to enable the worker to survive until his rehabilitation. They asked the Government representative to clarify the precise terms of the Act on this point, and what happened to the remaining rupees after the payment of the Rs. 500. As for prosecutions under the Act, they believed that the regular provision of information on the number of cases was vital if the present Committee was to be convinced that the Government was taking the question of sanctions seriously. The Act apparently provided for fines as well as imprisonment for up to three years; they wished to know, for example, how many offenders had actually been sent to prison for the maximum of three years.

Referring to the part of the observation dealing with child-bonded labour, the Workers' members noted that there was no reference to this in written information communicated by the Government nor in the Government representative's statement here. This was the first time that the Committee of Experts had explicitly referred to the exploitation of children in bondage and, in this regard, it referred (as it had done in 1990 for Bangladesh and Pakistan) to discussions in the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery of the United Nations Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, as well as the report of the South Asian Seminar on Child Servitude held in June-July 1989. This information described children in bondage in numerous occupations, often working under inhumaine and hazardous conditions, and noted that bondage was common in almost all categories of child labour. The Committee of Experts report stated:"According to the estimates contained in the report several million children, between the ages of 5 and 14, are in chronic bondage in agriculture; around a million in the brick kiln, stone quarry and construction industries; hundreds of thousands in carpet-weaving, handlooms, match and fire works, glass bangles, diamond-cutting and polishing, as well as in lock-making. Child bondage and forced labour is connected with the trafficking and kidnapping of children, repression, beating, sex abuse, starvation, abnormal working hours...". The Workers' members recognised that legislative and consitutional provisions had been adopted to protect children, but noted the concern of the Committee of Experts that these legislative provisions were not being applied and that, despite sanctions, exploiters did not fear punishment because of the weakness of the enforcement machinery. They recalled that the Committee of Experts, referring to Article 25 of the Convention, requested the Government to supply detailed information on the measures adopted or contemplated to eradicate the exploitation of child labour and they hoped that the Government would be in a position to indicate such measures taken in time for the Committee of Experts' next meeting. Recognising the great amount of material available, they asked for the Government's assurance that all information would be provided in detail to the Committee of Experts because this was one of the fundamental human rights Conventions being dealt with.

The Employers' members thanked the Government representative for the information provided and noted that, in addition to the problem of the bonded labour system, this year there was the new problem of child-bonded labour. Regarding the first issue, they believed that the question was one of implementation in practice because legislation on this already existed. Since this year's comments were very similar to those made when the present Committee had discussed this case in 1989, the Employers' members felt that implementation might be actually slowing down. They agreed with the Workers' members that part of the problem concerned determining the dimensions of the problem and defining who was in fact a bonded labourer. This was at the heart of the debate over the difference between the Government's estimation of the scope of the problem and that made by other groups. The legislation provided for vigilance committees, but it seemed that some of them had not been set up. In other cases, they apparently did not work very well. Referring to the rehabilitation of freed labourers, they noted that this was sometimes delayed or that some freed labourers fell back into bondage because the subsistence-level payments were not high enough. They also noted that there did not seem to be adequate sanctions against those who took advantage of individuals in this way. The Employers' members recognised that the question of child-bonded labour was an immense and heart-rending problem. Again, they noted that there were constitutional and statutory provisions which did not appear to have much effect in practice: as with bonded labour, the exploiters of child bonded labour seemed to have no fear of sanctions. Referring to the Government's statement that State Governments had been warned that their share of monies for rehabilitation of bonded labourers would not be released if prosecution efforts were not stepped up, the Employers were concerned that this strategy might backfire and result in hurting the very people whom the Government was trying to help. They were of the opinion that a better approach would be to tie the receipt of federal monies to programmes other than the rehabilitation programme itself; therefore, if prosecutions did not take place, this would not result in bonded labourers suffering.

The Workers' member of Pakistan recalled that Article 25 of the Convention provided that the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour should be punishable as a penal offence. While the Indian Constitution laid down that such practices were illegal and while legislation prohibited such abuse and exploitation, he noted the statistics cited by the Committee of Experts concerning not only adult-bonded labourers, but also the millions of children in bondage. He drew the attention of the Government representative to the call for a more global approach including measures such as a separate rehabilitation scheme for child-bonded labourers, and free and compulsory education at least for bonded children. Coming from the same region, he understood not only the importance of legislation and its effective implementation, but also the importance of the social and economic well-being of the less privileged classes of people, which required such measures as equal access to education, training, loans and land, enabling them to have an independent income-generating capacity.

The Government representative repeated that the responsibility for identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers rested on the State Governments which were the implementing authorities under the 1976 Act. The latest figures, as at 31 March 1990, showed a total of 245,636 bonded labourers identified by the State Governments, of which 218,028 had been rehabilitated. Her Government would give updated information on all the issues as requested by the Committee. As for the role of the vigilance committees, she admitted that they played a very important role in identifying the problem, and she believed that they had been set up in most places; the exact information would be submitted in due course. With regard to the managerial subsidies, she stressed that it was for the voluntary agencies to come to the Government and they had been encouraged to play a very active role and to assist the Government in addressing the problem in a more comprehensive manner. Regarding financial assistance of the Rs.6,250 and the first instalment of Rs.500, she explained again that the Rs.500 was given immediately to the bonded labourer to enable him to tide over the immediate problems encountered, and the whole amount was given as a package to the freed labourer so that he could start some land-based, skill-based or animal husbandry-related activity, depending on his aptitude. She appreciated the intervention of the Employers' members concerning the integration of the rehabilitation scheme to other anti-poverty schemes; that might well prove to be more beneficial. Lastly, regarding prosecutions, she stated that they were all referred to the courts of law and that, hopefully, her Government would be able to collect more details to present to the Committee of Experts in due course. She reassured the present Committee that her Government was commited to the complete abolition of bonded labour and was taking all necessary measures, with the help of the voluntary agencies and others, to overcome the difficulties.

Lastly, with regard to child labour, she mentioned the National Child Labour Policy of 1987 which proposed an integrated welfare approach to curb this problem in India's present social and economic context. Nine special projects had been set up in areas where child labour was particularly concentrated (the carpet industry, matches and fireworks industry, glass industry, gem-polishing, etc.) where special schools had been established, aimed at withdrawing children from such employment and giving them education through a formal or a non-formal pattern, vocational training, as well as supplementary nutrition and health care. The Policy also envisaged the stricter enforcement of the legislation on child labour and there was a government awareness campaign, with the help of voluntary organisations, for all these areas. Her Government was also trying to persuade parents not to send their children for employment by assisting needy families with income-generating programmes so that they could improve their earnings. There were integrated rural development programmes which had been extended, to all the projects. She cited the example of application of these anti-poverty schemes to the match and fireworks industry in rural areas. There were also proposals to start such national projects in other potential areas of concentration of child labour and to increase the number of special schools. A committee had been set up in the Ministry of Labour for monitoring the work of projects set up under the Policy. An ILO technical assistance programme was also helping in strengthening the national policy. The scheme of strengthening the enforcement has been extended on a pilot basis to four state Governments whereby financial assistence is provided involving assistance in the appointment of labour inspectors specifically to enforce the legislation concerning women and child labour. A child labour unit had also been set up in the National Labour Institute; it was concerned with documentation, research and training of enforcement officers to promote increasing general awareness of all concerned as much as possible. The Ministry of Labour had a plan for a scheme to give grants and aid to those voluntary agencies which wished to take up integrated welfare measures in the field of child labour as explained earlier. Her Government hoped that this kind of approach would enable a gradual reduction in the incidence of child labour in India and would ultimately fulfil the objectives laid down in India's Constitution.

The Committee noted the oral and written information supplied by the Government and the developments which had taken place. Nevertheless, it noted that, despite the efforts made, a great deal still remained to be done to overcome the serious problems already discussed during its previous meetings and raised afresh by the Committee of Experts concerning the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, including child-bonded labourers. The Committee trusted that the Government would spare no effort to implement the measures necessary to eliminate effectively debt bondage, including child bondage, and that it would supply the information requested by the Committee of Experts within the shortest possible time.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1989, Publication: 76th ILC session (1989)

A Government representative made the following statement. Identification and rehabilitation of bonded labour is a vast and complex problem, rooted in the socioeconomic fabric of the society and closely connected with the basic problems facing all developing countries - namely poverty and unemployment. To tackle this problem legislation is hardly sufficient: therefore, the Government of India launched a massive programme to combat poverty and unemployment, specifically addressed to the population living below the poverty line. This programme consists of schemes like Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), National Rural Employment Programme (NREP), Rural Labour Employment Guarantee Programme (RLEGP), etc. These efforts have shown results: in 1977- 78, 48.3 per cent of India's population was below the poverty line; in 1983-84 this figure came down to 37.4 per cent (i.e. 273 million people) and by 1990 it should drop to 25.8 per cent (i.e. 211 million people) which is no small achievement. However, there still remains a gigantic problem - the fact that about 211 million people are below the poverty line; this is why the Government is seeking the active help of unions and social organisations, and launched a special scheme to involve the voluntary agencies in the identification of bonded labourers.

As far as the estimates and identification of bonded labourers are concerned, no estimates made by the Gandhi Peace Foundation, the National Sample Survey or those quoted by the Sub- Committee on Bonded Labour can be regarded as realistic for the following reasons. Firstly, there have been very wide variations in the interpretation of who is a bonded labourer under the Act; all the estimates made so far were made before the Act was amended to further clarify the definition of bonded labour. Even under the amended Act, there is room for varying interpretations on account of differences of perception and also because accurate facts do not usually come out while conducting sample surveys. Secondly, the methodology adopted by the Gandhi Peace Foundation was not scientific and their sample was too small. Also, the investigators of the Gandhi Peace Foundation gathered the data on the basis of group discussions in the villages between them and the members of the villages gathered, as distinct from personal interviews with the households adopted by the National Sample Surveys, which identified the bonded labourers in certain sample villages from which the figures were multiplied. Therefore, the method of the National Sample Surveys was a little more scientific and, in fact, this has given the figure as 353,000 as against a much larger figure - about 2,617,000 which is the estimate of the Gandhi Peace Foundation. However, the National Sample Survey was not really a special one for bonded labour, as such. Its main focus was on employment and the unemployment situation in the country. Therefore the survey methodology was not really designed particularly for conducting the bonded labour survey. Even then, there is a wide fluctuation between the figures.

For these reasons, the Government has not accepted any of these estimates of the number of bonded labourers. The correct number of bonded labourers can be ascertained only after a proper identification through a legal process. If certain persons have been counted as bonded labourers during one of the sample surveys, but the competent authority under the Act concludes that they are not within the definition of bonded labour, no action under the law is possible and the scheme of rehabilitation of bonded labourers also is inapplicable. Of course, those concerned and their families would still be entitled to the benefits of other schemes pertaining to poverty allocation - like IRDP, NREP, RLEGP, TRYSEM - if the relevant criteria are satisfied. There cannot be a numerical target for the identification of bonded labour. The Government has instructed the state authorities to identify and release all the bonded labourers at once. If all the bonded labourers were not identified in the first instance, it was not because the Central Government had fixed a limit on the number to be identified, but rather because the State Governments and the competent authorities in the field were unable to ascertain the real situation. In spite of the best efforts made by the Government, the facts may not come out if the bonded labourers themselves hide the facts and to not complain. That is why the active involvement of trade unions and social organisations is crucially important.

As of 31 March 1989, the Government has identified 242,532 bonded labourers - far less than the 2 million estimated figure suggested by the Gandhi Peace Foundation. The Government does not know whether more bonded labourers exist or not; if it did, it would have identified them, If new bonded labourers are identified today, they may be cases of new bondage or old cases, which did not come to light in spite of the Government's best efforts. All the Government can say is that there are 242,532 known bonded labourers today, that it has rehabilitated 218,272 of them as of 31 March 1989, and that the target is to rehabilitate by 31 March 1990 all the bonded labourers who are known to exist today and all those who might be identified by then. In other words, by 31 March 1990, there will be no gap between bonded labourers identified and rehabilitated.

The Government representative acknowledged that implementation of the Act or the scheme of rehabilitation of bonded labourers may not be perfect. The Central Government actively monitors and reviews the implementation of the law and the scheme and provides financial assistance, but the implementation of both the law and the scheme is within the Powers of the State Governments who are autonomous under the Constitution. It is almost impossible to ensure a perfectly uniform interpretation of the Act throughout such a vast and diverse country. However, the Government has asked the State Governments to ensure proper functioning of the Vigilance Committee; these consist of non-officials and the Government depends on their help to identify the bonded labourers who are not identified for a variety of reasons. Thus, the Government has also instructed the State Governments to see that regular and effective meetings of these Vigilance Committee are held and to see that the registers required to be maintained under the rules are maintained properly.

The Government shared the concern expressed by the Committee of Experts in paragraph 4 of its observation that there have been far too few cases of prosecution under the Act. Of course, courts may order inprisonment or fines, depending upon the merits of each individual case. The judiciary is independent. However, the Union Labour Minister has instructed all the State Governments, emphasising the need for launching prosecutions immediately after identification or release of the bonded labourers. It has also been clarified that launching prosecutions of the guilty employers is a necessary condition to the granting of financial assistance for the purpose of rehabilitation of the released bonded labourers. This is to ward against erroneous identification in order to get the benefit of financial assistance.

As regards the integration of other poverty-alleviation programmes with the main scheme of rehabilitation, strict and clear instructions have been issued by the Central Government. The Programme Organisation Evaluation (POE) study mentioned by the Committee of Experts covers the period between June 1981 and February 1982, while government instructions regarding integration of other anti-poverty programmes with t were issued on 2 September 1982. The POE study therefore, could not have taken much notice of the integration mentioned above.

Regarding the functioning of the scheme to provide assistance to voluntary agencies for identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, the managerial subsidy is Rs.5,000 per annum up to 20 bonded labourers identified. For each additional bonded labourer identified, there is an additional Rs.100 and the overall ceiling is Rs.10,000. This would suffice for 70 bonded labourers and not 50 as mentioned by the Committee of Experts. The Government is not aware of any voluntary agency which has identified - more than 70 bonded labourers; if necessary, the ceiling can be reviewed. It is too early to assess the functioning of this scheme since it was launched on 30 October 1987, but the Government hopes that voluntary agencies will take up this task in a big way so that the Government's hands are strengthened and the message spreads far and wide.

The Government is fully committed to the release and rehabilitation of all bonded labourers and welcomes the co-operation of all those who are ready to help it. This programme is a very important ingredient in its top-priority 20-point economic programme, and it will make every effort to eradicate the evil of bonded labour.

The Government representative also indicated that he was handing over a copy of relevant portions of the Report of the Parliamentary Sub-Committee on Bonded Labour, referred to by the Committee of Experts in the last paragraph of its observation.

The Employers' members pointed out that this question had been discussed in 1986 for the last time and stated that a step had been made in the right direction; however, the question was whether the measures taken are sufficient or if they must be improved to reach the assigned objectives faster and better.

Everybody agreed that the Convention on forced or compulsory labour must be implemented in practice. The Government representative had made observations which had already been made during the last discussion. The definition of bonded labour had been modified since 1986 so as to facilitate identification of the persons to which the Act applies, but their number remains an unsettled question. While vigilance committees were to assist in the identification of bonded labourers, it appeared from the report of the Committee of Experts that the registers to be maintained by these committees were not adequately kept. Therefore, improvement and extension of these measures were very urgent.

Secondly, the Employer members wondered as to what happens to released bonder labourers: how are they rehabilitated? A new scheme for the involvement of voluntary agencies had been established, but there was criticism about insufficient material means available to these agencies, and there were doubts as to the results and whether the steps taken were sufficient.

More general questions arose about the integration and implementation of a number of different programmes mentioned by the Committee of Experts and their coverage of bonded labourers. According to the Committee of Experts, less than 1 per cent of all those concerned benefited from the programmes, which was not enough, given the size of the country and the magnitude of the problem. Statistical information could certainly be improved, but there appeared also to be a more general problem of education at all levels of society.

The report by the Government representative and the Committee of Experts report showed that a lot was being done but the problem was not solved yet. A better co-ordinatiom of all the measures might be necessary. Also, the Government did not have all the information required. Therefore, the Employer members strongly encouraged the Government not only to continue its efforts but to intensify them, so that despite the enormity of the problem solutions may be found faster and within a reasonable period of time serious progress can be made.

The Workers' members stated that, following the comments of the Committee of Experts (expressed over many years), the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, had been amended in 1985, which enabled the scope of the definition of bonded labourer to be clarified, However, in spite of the passing of this Act, in practice the situation remained the same as before, as had been observed by the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh. The law had not yet achieved its objectives due to the absence of adequate implementing measures. The Committee of Experts had noted that prosecutions were too few and punishment too light. Furthermore, only a small number of freed bonded labourers had been able to benefit from the debt-release and rehabilitation programmes. As the bonded labour system still existed in spite of the passing of legislation outlawing it, the Government had to take effective measures and put into place more significant means to ensure the rigorous application of these laws.

The Workers' member of the United States referred to the statements of the spokesmen of the Employers and of the Workers and pointed out that, just as when the Committee had discussed this case in 1984 and 1985, the Government representative had conveyed the will of his Government to eliminate the social evil of bonded labour. These good intentions should be put into practice. In this respect, he recalled that, in connection with the stone quarries question, the Supreme Court of India had pointed to some means that could detect more efficiently cases where bonded labourers existed and help to eliminate this form of forced labour through the efforts of the district magistrates, the State Governments and the Vigilance Committees. The speaker wondered whether these agencies were working efficiently and effectively and whether it might not be appropriate to obtain the services of the ILO to deal with this problem.

The Government representative thanked the Employers' and Workers' members for expressing their views and giving some very valuable advice. They had stated that implementation of the law required to be improved and that the means which had been employed to tackle the situation were not strong enough; much stronger means would be employed.

The statement that only 1 per cent of the bonded labourers had been covered was based on the presumption that the actual number was above 2 million, as estimated by the Gandhi Peace Foundation. His Government had not been able to accept this estimate because there was no evidence at all to support it; 242,000 bonded labourers had been identified and 218,000 had already been rehabilitated. The Government did not know whether the bonded labourers existed or not, but it was trying very hard to reach a final count, with the help of State Governments, various committees, voluntary organisations and the trade unions. It was trying to improve the implementation of the existing legal provisions and was in favour of punishment for the guilty, but it could not instruct the courts which punishment to apply. The speaker added that a National Commission of Labour had been established to examine the problems of rural labour in general, including bonded labour. He stated that his Government did not feel the need for technical assistance from the ILO on this question since it was simply a question of implementation, not a technical matter which could benefit from the intervention of foreign experts. Returning to the question of figures, the Government had not fixed any target because its target was all the bonded labourers who exist - if they exist.

The Workers' members stated that differences of opinion might well exist on the figures, which were difficult to verify in practice. However, discussions which had taken place within the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery of the Sub- Committee on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities of the United Nations, as well as information provided by the trade union organisations showed that bonded labour remained a very serious problem. The practical application of the law should be reinforced more vigorously and with effective sanctions. They hoped that the Government would shortly be reporting progress on this matter.

The Committee had taken note of the explanations supplied by the Government representative e Committee noted the changes reported by the Government representative; it recalled, however, the points discussed at its previous sessions and mentioned by the Committee of Experts. The Committee requested the Government to continue its efforts to put the practice in question in conformity with the requirements of the Convention and to provide the information requested by the Committee of Experts.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Articles 1 (paragraph 1), 2 (paragraph 1), and 25, of the Convention. Culturally sanctioned practices of child prostitution linked to trafficking for purposes of commercial sexual exploitation. In its previous direct request the Committee noted the 2007 communication from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), referring to a culturally sanctioned practice known, among other things, as “devadasi”, under which lower caste girls are dedicated to local “deities” or objects of worship and once initiated as “devadasi” are sexually exploited by followers of the “deity” within the local community as they grow up. The Committee hoped that in its next report the Government would comment on the information about this practice contained in the communication of the ITUC, bearing in mind the terms of Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. The Committee notes that no such comment has been received from the Government thus far.

The Committee previously noted the following indications contained in the ITUC’s communication referred to above:

–           The devadasi system constitutes forced labour within the meaning of the Convention, since girls are dedicated as devadasi without their consent and are subsequently compelled to provide sexual services to the community under duress.

–           Research has also revealed that the practice is increasingly linked to the problem of trafficking in girls for commercial sexual exploitation.

–           Devadasi ceremonies and rituals have been legally banned – the practice was formally prohibited after Independence, and the States of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh enacted Devadasi (Prohibition of Dedication) Acts during the 1980s.

–           Existing legislation provides for fines and terms of imprisonment for those responsible for dedications, but no penalties are prescribed for those who sexually exploit the devadasi.

–           Although during the 1990s legal prohibitions appeared to have little effect, police action in the late 1990s was effective in discouraging devadasi dedications. However, research has not identified any instances of prosecutions against procurers of girls or performers of dedications under the terms of the Acts.

–           The devadasi system and its regional variations continue to flourish and have not been abandoned despite constitutional provisions and legislation prohibiting the practice.

–           While some progress has been made in reducing the practice, this success has led to a degree of official complacency, particularly in relation to dedications linked to the commercial sex industry.

–           There is an urgent need for awareness-raising among teachers, health workers, local officials and police, as well as greater engagement and commitment of state and local authorities.

–           Self-help groups and non-governmental organizations have been effective in raising awareness among the devadasi and in providing assistance, but their capacity needs to be strengthened, and their effectiveness depends on a corresponding sensitization of law enforcement officials.

The Committee notes from the 2007 Human Rights Manual for District Magistrates, published by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), that the devadasi system is linked to the practice of trafficking in girls for commercial sexual exploitation. It also notes, in particular, that this practice, which is a part of the wider devadasi system, is widely prevalent in parts of the country, known by local names such as Jogin, Jogati, Basavi, Mathamma in Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Karnataka. Most of the people subjected to such exploitation are from scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. Some of the states, such as Andhra Pradesh, have passed enactments prohibiting such practices and providing for punishment of those who abet such practices.

The Committee also refers in this connection to the 2008 concluding observations of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in relation to the implementation by India of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (E/C.12/IND/CO/5, paragraph 25), in which the UN Committee expressed its deep concern about the lack of progress achieved in eliminating the devadasi system and other traditional practices that are harmful and discriminatory to women and girls, in spite of the legal prohibitions of such practices in the national legislation.

The Committee requests the Government to take stronger measures to abolish the devadasi system, including measures to vigorously enforce prohibitions and penalties under anti-dedication acts; to enforce anti-trafficking laws against those who target children from communities that are traditionally tied to the devadasi system; and to focus law enforcement efforts on the link between the devadasi system and the practice of trafficking in girls for commercial sexual exploitation. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide, in its next report, detailed information about the progress of such measures, including copies of legislation with prohibitions on dedication practices and information about cases involving prosecutions and any penalties imposed, including copies of any relevant court rulings.

Article 2, paragraph 2, subparagraph (c). Compulsory labour of convicted seafarers placed at the disposal of private shipowners. The Committee notes that, under section 207 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, any seafarer engaged outside India who is imprisoned for any offence for a term not exceeding three months may, by order of any magistrate at the request of the master or owner or his/her agent, be conveyed on-board ship for the purpose of proceeding on the voyage if the services of the seafarer are required on-board the ship, notwithstanding that the period for which the sentence of imprisonment was imposed has not terminated.

The Committee recalls that Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention excludes from its scope any work or service exacted from any person as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law, provided that the said work or service is carried out under the supervision and control of a public authority and that the said person is not hired to or placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. While this Article strictly prohibits convicts from being placed at the disposal of private employers, the Committee has considered that the private employment of convicted persons may be compatible with the Convention, provided they offer themselves voluntarily without being subjected to pressure or the menace of any penalty. This necessarily requires the formal consent of the persons concerned, as well as the existence of conditions of work approximating a free labour relationship (see the explanations in paragraphs 59 and 60 of the Committee’s 2007 General Survey on the eradication of forced labour).

The Committee hopes that the necessary measures will be taken in order to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention, e.g., by amending section 207 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, so as to indicate clearly that seafarers may be conveyed on-board ship for the performance of their duties only with their voluntary consent, without the menace of any penalty, and subject to conditions of work approximating a free labour relationship. Pending the amendment, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in its next report, information on the application of this provision in practice, indicating, in particular, whether prisoners concerned give their voluntary consent to work on-board and whether they perform the work under conditions approximating a free labour relationship, including wages and social security.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee has noted the Government’s reports received in September 2008 and August 2009. It has also noted the communication dated 29 August 2008 received from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), as well as the Government’s response to this communication. The Committee has also noted the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards during the 97th Session of the Conference in June 2008.

Articles 1 (paragraph 1), 2 (paragraph 1) and 25 of the Convention. Bonded labour; magnitude of the problem. In its 2008 report, the Government indicated that, since the enactment of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 (BLSA), 287,555 bonded labourers had been identified, of whom 267,593 had been rehabilitated. The Government also stated that it would “reserve comment” about estimates of the total number of bonded labourers reported by other sources. However, the Committee notes, from the ITUC communication referred to above, the findings from survey research studies that bonded labour in agriculture and in industries like mining, brick kilns, silk and cotton production, and bidi making, was likely to be affecting millions of workers across the country. The Committee, in its previous observation, urged the Government to undertake a comprehensive national survey on bonded labour as a matter of priority, using appropriate statistical methods. The Government, in its report and through the statements by the Government representative during the discussion in the Conference Committee, reiterated its previous indications that statistical tools or methodologies used to collect macro or aggregated data were inappropriate for a survey of bonded labour. The Government also reiterated that it had provided grants to state governments for conducting district-level surveys of bonded labour, and that a large number of such surveys had been conducted by the state governments. Given the wide disparities in assessments of the overall prevalence of bonded labour in the national economy and the importance of this question to the process of supervision by the Committee of the application of the Convention in India, the Committee once again urges the Government to explore ways to undertake a national survey of bonded labour with the involvement of the social partners and stakeholder organizations, using any appropriate statistical methods and, as far as practicable, all existing data from the district-level surveys referred to above. The Committee hopes that the Government’s next report will contain information on the measures taken or envisaged in this regard. In the meantime, it asks the Government to provide copies of all available reports of the district-level surveys conducted by State governments.

Vigilance committees

With regard to the functioning and effectiveness of the vigilance committees established under the BLSA, inter alia, to assist the courts in monitoring and ensuring the proper implementation of the Act, the Government reiterates that all state governments have confirmed that vigilance committees have been constituted at the district and subdivisional levels and that the meetings are being held regularly. However, the Committee notes, from the ITUC communication referred to above, the research findings by the Centre for Education and Communication (CEC) and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), which indicate that in many states the committees remain ineffective bodies; do not meet regularly; have not been functional; and are improperly constituted, and thereby the occurrence of bonded labour goes undetected. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to address the shortcomings in the vigilance committees, with a view to ensuring their proper functioning and effectiveness. It hopes the Government will provide, in its next report, information on the progress of such measures, including copies of any relevant reports, studies and enquiries.

Release and rehabilitation

With regard to the Government’s policies and programmes for the release and rehabilitation of identified bonded labourers, the Committee notes, from the Government’s reports, the indications that a special group chaired by the Union Labour and Employment Secretary has been monitoring implementation of the BLSA and the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) for the rehabilitation of bonded labourers, and had held a series of 15 region-level meetings with state government participation between 2004 and 2009; that the Ministry of Labour and Employment has taken concrete measures to improve the planning process and strengthen the monitoring mechanism; and that state governments have been issued detailed guidelines for implementing the CSS and advised to integrate the scheme into other ongoing poverty alleviation schemes.

While noting these positive developments, the Committee also notes, however, from the ITUC communication, the research findings of the NHRC, which has a court-ordered mandate to monitor the implementation of the BLSA, that some state governments are an obstacle to the eradication of bonded labour; that many continue to deny the existence of bonded labour; that state officials often have a poor understanding of how bonded labour is legally defined; that state governments are failing to compile data on the number of bonded labourers; and that consequently the identification and release of bonded labourers in recent years has been extremely low. The Committee also notes the research findings by the CEC that bonded labourers who are rehabilitated do not always receive the full rehabilitation amount; that corruption and delays in the issuing of rehabilitation packages are prevalent; that delays occur that can effectively force families back into debt bondage; and that rehabilitation assistance has not proved to be very effective.

The Committee hopes that the Government will ensure that the measures noted above to implement release and rehabilitation programmes at the state level have as their central focus the serious problems identified in the communication of the ITUC and are effectively implemented, and that the monitoring mechanisms it has put into place are fully functional and serving their intended purpose. It requests the Government to provide, in its next report, detailed information in this regard, as well as the most recent information the NHRC has called for on identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers.

Law enforcement

With regard to the issue of enforcement of the penalty provisions of the BLSA and the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986 (CLPRA), the Committee notes the statement of the Government representative during the discussion in the Conference Committee that the Government’s main priority was the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, but that nevertheless, 5,893 cases of prosecution and 1,289 convictions had been reported by the states so far under the BLSA, and that the NHRC had organized state-level sensitization workshops in collaboration with the Ministry of Labour and Employment. However, the Committee notes with concern the findings by the NHRC, referred to in the ITUC communication, that state governments were neglecting to prosecute offenders under the bonded labour system, and that it was clear from statistical evidence that the law was poorly enforced and employers were rarely prosecuted successfully.

The Committee urges the Government to take effective measures to further strengthen its law enforcement mechanisms, including measures recommended by the NHRC or other official bodies, and that such measures address the problems identified in the communication of the ITUC. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide, in its next report, detailed information in this regard and repeats its request for statistical data and other information that indicate, not only numbers of prosecutions and convictions, but the specific criminal penalties which have actually been imposed on employers of bonded labourers convicted under the BLSA, as well as copies of any relevant court judgements.

Child labour

With regard to implementation of the CLPRA, which was amended in October 2006 to encompass a series of additional occupations, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that it has carried out awareness-raising meetings and media campaigns and has also initiated and issued guidance to state governments on the effective implementation of this prohibition and on the preparation of state-level action plans. The Committee notes that, while the annex to the Government’s report includes state-level statistics on inspections, investigations, prosecutions, convictions and acquittals in relation to enforcement of the CLPRA, the information supplied does not include any statistics on the nature of the sanctions or sentences imposed in cases of convictions.

The Committee hopes that the Government will continue and further expand its efforts to raise public awareness about the CLPRA, and that the act will be fully implemented through the state-level action plans. It requests the Government to provide, in its next report, detailed information in this regard, as well as statistics and other information on the specific penalties and sentences imposed in cases of convictions under the CLPRA, including copies of any relevant court judgements. Please also provide information on the status of the Draft Offences against Children Bill, 2006.

With regard to the National Child Labour Project (NCLP), an action programme under which working children are withdrawn from employment in hazardous occupations and placed into special schools for a maximum period of three years, the Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government concerning the schools involved and the student enrolments. It hopes that the Government will expand and strengthen this programme under the Eleventh Plan (2007–12), and that it will provide information in this regard, including information from the monitoring committees set up to supervise, monitor and evaluate the NCLP.

Prostitution and commercial sexual exploitation

The Committee notes the indications of the Government that the Immoral Traffic Prevention Bill, 2006, amends the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITPA), by, inter alia, increasing the age of majority from 16 to 18; repealing section 8, which penalizes solicitation for purposes of prostitution, and section 20, which concerns removal of prostitutes from any public place; redefines the offence of “trafficking in persons” to align it with the definition of trafficking contained in the optional protocols on trafficking in the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime; and criminalizes conduct of persons who frequent brothels for the purpose of sexual exploitation. The Committee hopes that the Bill will soon be adopted and requests the Government to supply a copy of the new legislation, as soon as it is promulgated.

The Committee notes the reference to Ujjawala, a “Comprehensive Scheme for Prevention of Trafficking and Rescue, Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Victims of Trafficking and Commercial Sexual Exploitation”, a federal scheme launched on 4 December 2007 which comprises five components: prevention, rescue, rehabilitation, reintegration, and repatriation. The Government also refers to the Central Advisory Committee (CAC) for preventing and combating trafficking of women and children for commercial sexual exploitation, which was established by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, and to the proposed establishment of central and state-level nodal authorities. The Committee considers that these measures represent positive developments and hopes they will continue to evolve and be effective. It hopes the Government will supply updated information about the work of Ujjawala, the CAC and nodal authorities, including any official reports assessing the effectiveness of their work and its impact in practice on trafficking in women and children for purposes of commercial sexual exploitation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

Culturally sanctioned practices involving sexual slavery

The Committee notes the 2007 communication from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), referring to a ritualistic, culturally sanctioned practice known as Devadasi, under which lower caste girls are dedicated to a deity or object of worship and once initiated as Devadasi are subject to non-consensual sex with one or many followers of the deity within the local community. The Committee notes the following indications from the ITUC’s communication.

–           The Devadasi system constitutes forced labour within the meaning of the Convention, since girls are dedicated as Devadasi without their consent and are subsequently compelled to have non-consensual sex and to provide sexual services to the community under duress.

–           Research has also revealed that the practice is increasingly linked to the problem of trafficking in girls for commercial sexual exploitation.

–           Devadasi ceremonies and rituals have been legally banned – the practice was formally prohibited after Independence, and the States of Karnataka and Andrha Pradesh enacted Devadasi (Prohibition of Dedication) Acts during the 1980s.

–           Existing legislation provides for fines and terms of imprisonment for those responsible for dedications, but no penalties are prescribed for those who sexually exploit the Devadasi.

–           Although during the 1990s legal prohibitions appeared to have little effect, police action in the late 1990s was effective in discouraging Devadasi dedications. However, research has not identified any instances of prosecutions against procurers of girls or performers of dedications under the terms of the Acts.

–           The Devadasi system and its regional variations continue to flourish and have not been abandoned despite constitutional provisions and legislation prohibiting the practice.

–           While some progress has been made in reducing the practice, this success has led to a degree of official complacency, particularly in relation to dedications linked to the commercial sex industry.

–           There is an urgent need for awareness raising among teachers, health workers, local officials and police, as well as greater engagement and commitment of state and local authorities.

–           Self-help groups and non-governmental organizations have been effective in raising awareness among the Devadasi and in providing assistance, but their capacity needs to be strengthened, and their effectiveness depends on a corresponding sensitization of law enforcement officials.

The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will comment on these and other points contained in the 2007 communication of the ITUC, bearing in mind the terms of Articles 2(1) and 25 of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

1. The Committee has noted the Government’s reports received in 2005 and 2006 together with its two replies to the communications received from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU, now ITUC – International Trade Union Confederation) dated 31 August 2005. The Committee also notes the further communication of the ITUC dated 30 August 2007 which was forwarded to the Government on 17 September 2007, in order to afford it the opportunity to make comments on the matters raised therein.

Bonded labour and the need to identify the magnitude of the practice

2. The Committee has previously referred on many occasions to the urgent need for a comprehensive, large-scale national survey on bonded labour, using appropriate methodologies, in order to ascertain the scope and order of magnitude of the practice and of the efforts needed to identify, free, and rehabilitate workers who are exploited by it and to prosecute those who use it to exploit them. This issue is again a subject of the 2005 communication from the ICFTU referred to in paragraph 1 above.

3. The ICFTU in its 2005 communication on this topic, adverted to a number of matters including indications that:

–           according to the 2005 ILO report, “A global alliance against forced labour”, a commission set up in 1995 by the Supreme Court to investigate bonded labour cases in Tamil Nadu conducted a large-scale survey and concluded that, in that state alone, there were more than 1 million bonded labourers spread across 23 districts and 20 occupations;

–           while the Government has denied the existence of bonded child labour in the silk industry, a report by the Centre for Education and Communication (CEC), in conjunction with Anti-Slavery International, highlights a 1998 report by the Labour Commissioner indicating that 3,077 cases of child bonded labour were found in silk reeling units in areas of the Bangalore district of Karnataka;

–           the number of people identified by the Government since 1976 does not represent the total number of bonded labourers in the country. It again referred to the systematic survey on bonded labour conducted in 1978–79, the Ghandi Peace Foundation (GPF), and the National Labour Institute (NLI), an autonomous body of the Ministry of Labour, which estimated that 2.6 million bonded labourers were employed in agriculture alone.

4. The Committee notes the Government’s response in its 2006 report and the annex attached thereto, which indicated that:

–           as a result of government-funded local surveys, during the period 2000–01 to 2005–06, 15,111 bonded labourers were identified in 149 districts and all of them were rehabilitated;

–           the incidence of bonded labour, as reported from state governments, declined from 2,465 bonded labourers in 2003–04, to 866 in 2004–05, to 397 during the year 2005–06; this decline, according to the Government, is “a result of concerted efforts made by the Government through various anti-poverty programmes, awareness, sensitization, etc.”;

–           the Government considers that the figures quoted by the non-governmental agencies regarding incidence of bonded labour relied upon by the ICFTU are invalid, as they were not derived from the use of appropriate statistical tools for collecting primary data;

–           the Government reiterates that it does not consider it necessary to conduct a large-scale national survey on bonded labour, since the central Government already provides grants to the states to conduct district-wide surveys, and that a national survey is not possible to carry out because of the need to use qualitative methods for collecting appropriate data.

5. In relation to the need for a comprehensive national survey, the Committee notes the 2004–05 Annual Report of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) from its Internet site, indicating that, pursuant to the recommendations of its Expert Group on Bonded Labour, the commission has since 2003 conducted workshops for sensitizing and educating district magistrates, police superintendents, NGOs and other field officials involved in the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 (BLSA); that such workshops have “proved useful in identifying significant issues relating to identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labour”; and that among the “important points” emerging from this process was the need for a “fresh, comprehensive survey to determine the magnitude of bonded labour”.

6. The Committee also notes from a news update dated 28 June 2007 and posted on the Internet site of the NHRC, that during a national workshop held on 28 June 2007 a former NHRC special rapporteur, who chaired a session on adequacy and effectiveness of administrative mechanisms, called for “effective surveys to identify bonded labour”.

7. The Committee once again urges the Government to undertake a large-scale national survey on bonded labour as a matter of priority, using valid and appropriate statistical methodologies, and requests that the Government supply information in its next report on the measures taken or envisaged towards this end.

Vigilance committees

8. The Committee in its previous observation requested that the Government continue to provide information on the vigilance committees (VCs) – the bodies constituted by state governments at district and subdivision levels pursuant to section 13 of the BLSA to, inter alia, advise district magistrates to ensure that the provisions of the BLSA are properly implemented, survey for the occurrence of bonded labour offences, monitor the number of such offences, and provide for the rehabilitation of freed bonded labourers – as well as to provide information on measures taken or contemplated to improve the effectiveness of the VCs in carrying out these activities.

9. The Committee has noted that the ICFTU, in its 2005 communication, referred to the 2001–02 Annual Report of the NHRC, which states that the VCs “were not in position in many places” and even where constituted “have become defunct over the years”, and that they “have not made worthwhile contributions anywhere in terms of the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labour”.

10. The Government in its 2006 report indicates that state governments have all confirmed the constitution of VCs, that “the meetings are being held regularly”, and that state governments are frequently requested to ensure that such committees are duly constituted or reconstituted. The Government, in reply to the ICFTU comments, stated in its 2005 report that “there might be a few instances when the VCs did not meet regularly (but) these instances cannot lead to a conclusion that (they) were not … delivering useful results”.

11. In relation to the operation of VCs, the Committee notes the following from the Annual Report 2004–05 of the NHRC, that:

–           in Rajasthan, the State Labour Committee on Bonded Labour was not meeting regularly and had held no meetings after 10 September 2001;

–           in Maharashtra, the VCs “are not meeting regularly and the detection of bonded labour is practically nil in the State”; and

–           in Punjab, there had been no reported detection of bonded labour since the previous review, and despite advice from the commission, the state government “does not seem interested in taking up the Awareness Generation Programme”.

12. The Committee further notes that the general recommendations which have evolved out of the series of sensitization and awareness-raising workshops conducted by the NHRC and referred to above, have included recommendations:

–           for a convergence of the work done by government agencies and NGOs;

–           for the constitution of district and subdivisional level VCs;

–           for the VCs to examine the status of already rehabilitated bonded labourers, to plan for rehabilitation of identified bonded labourers, and to monitor bonded labour-prone areas and industries; and

–           for the periodic review of VCs and their functions.

13. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will address itself to the shortcomings of the VCs in fulfilling their mandate under the BLSA, which are clearly evidenced by a preponderance of recent information from governmental and other sources, including that cited above, and that it comment on recommendations concerning the apparent need for other local institutions to assume the functions of the VCs.

Law enforcement

14. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to the problem of law enforcement in connection with the eradication of bonded labour and sought information on the number of prosecutions, convictions and acquittals in various states under the BLSA and also questioned the adequacy of the penalties imposed. The Committee previously observed that, in the light of Article 25 of the Convention, the number of prosecutions launched under the Act did not appear to be adequate in relation to the number of identified and freed bonded labourers reported by the Government.

15. The Committee notes that the ICFTU in its 2005 communication referred to a finding by the NHRC reported in its Annual Report 2001–02 that, “the prosecution of offenders under the bonded labour system has, in fact, been neglected in every state reviewed”.

16. The Government in its 2005 report referred to section 21 of the BLSA, under which the power of judicial magistrates to try offences may be conferred upon executive magistrates, and stated that the Act “has enough penal provisions to deal with the issue of bonded labour”, and that the judiciary in India “is proactive in dealing with the issue of bonded labour”.

17. The Committee notes that the Government in its 2006 report states that, although exact information on the number of prosecutions launched for offences relating to bonded labour during the period under review was not available, according to statistics reported by state governments, there had been 5,893 prosecutions initiated; convictions obtained in 1,289 cases; and fines of 107 million rupees so far realized under the BLSA. The Government adds that the low rate of prosecutions could be explained, in part, by the existence in rural and informal sectors of society of an informal system of grievance and dispute resolution centred on village-level bodies, known as “Nyaya Panchayat” or “Lok Adalats”.

18. The Committee also notes the following findings of the NHRC published in its 2004–05 Annual Report:

–           in Uttar Pradesh, 55 bonded labourers were identified and freed in 2004–05, but the “prosecution aspect remains totally neglected”;

–           in Madhya Pradesh, a total of 22 criminal cases under the BLSA had been registered since 1999–2000 and 20 cases were pending trial, but the power of executive magistrates to try offences conferred under section 21 of the BLSA was being used “reluctantly”; and

–           in Jharkand, orders regarding the empowerment of executive magistrates to exercise powers of judicial magistrates under the BLSA had not yet been issued.

19. The Committee further notes from the 2004–05 Annual Report of the NHRC that among the “important points” emerging from the series of sensitization and awareness-raising workshops on bonded labour conducted by the commission since 2003 in association with the Ministry of Labour and Employment and concerned state governments, and referred to above, is the need for “prosecution of offending employers”.

20. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will provide comprehensive information about the practical workings of the village institutions referred to above, including:

–           detailed information about their geographic prevalence and detailed statistics, for every state, concerning the number of bonded labour complaints lodged with these bodies;

–           the number of bonded labour cases adjudicated through them; and

–           the outcomes of such cases.

The Committee also asks that in its next report the Government supply detailed information about measures it is taking or contemplating to address the serious and ongoing deficiencies in the prosecution of cases of bonded labour and, more generally, in the enforcement of the penalties and sanctions prescribed under Chapter VI of the BLSA, as well as information assessing the practical results of the ongoing sensitization and awareness-raising workshops conducted by the NHRC for law enforcement officials and members of the judiciary.

Release and rehabilitation

21. The Committee notes the indication in the 2005 observations of the ICFTU that significant problems exist in policies and programmes for the release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, which include, among other things, corruption and bribery in the distribution of rehabilitation packages; discriminatory treatment in the provision of rehabilitation packages against bonded labourers identified by non-governmental organizations; and the failure of rehabilitation resources to provide economic security and sustained livelihoods to freed workers.

22. The Committee notes the reply of the Government in its 2005 report to the ICFTU comments in which it: indicated that efforts were being made to upgrade the skills of beneficiaries required in their previous occupations; referred to directions to state governments to dovetail rehabilitation packages with other poverty-alleviation programmes; and asserted that no case of relapse into bondage had been received from beneficiaries already rehabilitated.

23. The Committee also notes from a news update of the NHRC dated 28 June 2007 and referred to above, that in the course of a national workshop held on 28 June 2007, the secretary of the Ministry of Labour and Employment stated that “no data on the freed bonded labour is available and how their rehabilitation has taken place is still a question”, and that the secretary also called upon state officials to initiate projects so as to converge development schemes for the benefit of freed bonded labourers.

24. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will supply detailed information about the measures it refers to for upgrading the skills of freed bonded labourers and about its policy of integrating rehabilitation packages with other poverty-alleviation programmes, including information about the implementation and practical outcomes of these policies and programmes.

25. The Committee also requests that in its next report the Government provide detailed information about measures it is taking or contemplating to address the significant problems and shortcomings, exemplified in the reports discussed above, in the Government’s policies and programmes for the release and rehabilitation of identified bonded labourers.

Child labour

26. The Committee has previously raised a number of questions concerning efforts to eliminate child labour falling under the Convention (i.e. in conditions which are sufficiently hazardous or arduous that the work concerned cannot be considered voluntary). The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would redouble its efforts in this field, particularly with regard to the identification of working children and strengthening the law enforcement machinery, in order to eradicate the exploitation of children, especially in hazardous occupations; and it also requested the Government to supply the results of the latest census on the number of working children in the country.

27. The Committee notes the indications of the Government in its 2006 report, including the following statements:

–           based on census data from 2001 there are an estimated 12.63 million child labourers nationally in the age group 5–14, an increase from the estimate of 11.28 million based on the 1991 Census;

–           during the 10th Five-Year Plan (2002–07) the National Child Labour Projects (NCLPs) scheme for the rehabilitation of working children withdrawn from hazardous occupations, launched by the Ministry of Labour and Employment on 15 August 1994, was expanded in scope from 100 to 250 districts;

–           the central Government has increased the budget allocation for NCLPs from 2,500 million rupees under the previous plan to 6,670 million rupees under the current Five-Year Plan;

–           increased monitoring of government schemes for eliminating child labour has taken place at state and district levels.

28. The Committee notes with interest that the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986 (CLPRA), was amended in October 2006, in order to extend the prohibition of employment of children to occupations involving employment in domestic service, hotels, motels, restaurants, road-side eateries, tea shops, resorts, and recreational centres.

29. The Committee requests that in its next report the Government supply information about the application and enforcement of the prohibitions under this amendment to the CLPRA.

30. The Committee notes, with regard to enforcement of the CLPRA, the statement of the Government in its 2006 report that it was “moving in the direction” of creating suitable enforcement machinery. The Committee, however, also notes the statistical data (as reported by state governments and the Organisation of the Chief Labour Commissioner) posted on the Internet site of the National Child Labour Project of the Ministry of Labour and Employment. This data include the following comparative statistics for the periods 2004–05 and 2002–03:

–           in 2004–05, 242,223 inspections were conducted and 16,632 violations were detected, whereas in 2002–03, 26,411 violations were detected;

–           in 2004–05, 2,609 prosecutions were launched compared to 9,159 in 2002‑03; and

–           in 2004–05, there were 1,385 convictions and 447 acquittals, in comparison to 4,013 convictions in 2002–03.

31. The Committee notes that there has been a steep drop in the detection of violations and initiation of prosecutions during 2004–05, when at the same time the estimates indicate a continuing increase in child labour. The Committee also notes that no data were reported on the nature of the sanctions or sentences imposed in cases where convictions were achieved.

32. The Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on the nature of sanctions or sentences received in relation to successful convictions, supplying copies of the court decisions (including those of the Supreme Court) concerning the work of children in hazardous occupations. The Committee also asks the Government to comment on the drop in the detection of violations and initiation of prosecutions during 2004–05 and also any explanation for the comparatively high rate of acquittals. Further, the Committee requests the Government to elaborate on what is meant by its assertion that the Government is committed to “moving in the direction” of creating suitable enforcement machinery.

33. The Committee notes two news releases of the Ministry of Labour and Employment dated 20 August 2007 and 22 August 2007, posted on the Internet site of the Government’s Public Information Bureau, indicating that the Ministry was now implementing its scheme of NCLPs in 250 districts in a total of 20 states. Under the scheme, these children were placed into special schools and provided with accelerated bridging education, vocational training, mid-day meals, stipends, and health check-up facilities. At present, 343,000 children were enrolled in the special schools and 457,000 children had already been mainstreamed into the formal education system since the scheme’s inception. An expansion of the scheme along with an enlargement of its scope through additional components during the 11th Five-Year Plan (2007–12) was under consideration. The programme covered children working in notified hazardous occupations in the agricultural sector, among others. In addition, a scheme of grants-in-aid to voluntary agencies for the benefit of children withdrawn from hazardous occupations was being implemented in other districts not covered by the NCLP scheme.

34. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will provide updated and detailed information about the implementation in all 20 states of the NCLPs scheme for rehabilitating child labour withdrawn from hazardous industries and about the status of plans to enlarge its scope under the next Five-Year Plan.

Prostitution and commercial sexual exploitation

35. In its earlier comments, the Committee welcomed the adoption of a National Plan of Action to combat trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children, among other positive measures taken by the Government, as well as the Government’s intention to review the existing legal framework including the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, the India Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code and the Evidence Act, with a view to making the punishment more stringent for traffickers but at the same time, more victim-friendly. The Committee also expressed the hope that measures would be taken to compile reliable statistics concerning the extent and magnitude of the problem of trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation in India, including the problem of child prostitution.

36. The Committee notes with interest the enactment of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 (CPCRA), referred to by the Government in its 2006 report. The Committee notes that the purpose of the Act is to provide for the constitution of a national commission and analogous state-level commissions “for providing speedy trial of offences against children”. The Committee notes some of the salient points of the CPCRA with respect to the functions and powers of the national commission, which include:

–           inquiring into violation of child rights and recommend initiation of proceedings in such cases (section 13(1)(c));

–           examining all factors that inhibit the enjoyment of rights of children such as trafficking and prostitution and to recommend appropriate remedial measures (section (13(1)(d));

–           inquiring into complaints relating to the deprivation and violation of child rights and take up such matters with appropriate authorities (section 13(1)(j));

–           forwarding any case to a magistrate, who shall hear the complaint against the accused as if it were forwarded under section 346 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (section 14(2));

–           where an inquiry discloses a violation “of a serious nature or contravention of provisions of any law”, recommending the initiation of proceedings for prosecution (section 15(i));

–           commissions constituted by state governments at the state level are accorded functions and powers analogous to those of the national commission (section 24).

37. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to proposed legislation, the draft Offences against Children Bill, 2006 (DOCB). The Government states that the DOCB seeks to improve deficiencies in the India Penal Code, which does not separately take cognizance of various offences against children, and that it specifically includes the offence of sexual exploitation of children and trafficking and provides for corresponding sanctions.

38. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will supply information concerning the practical application of the provisions of the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 referred to above, as they relate to trafficking of children for purposes of commercial sexual exploitation or prostitution. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon enact the draft Offences against Children Bill and asks the Government to supply updated information on the prospects for such action.

39. The Committee also notes from the Internet site of the Parliament of India that the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Amendment Bill, 2006 was introduced in the Lok Sabha in May 2006 and adopted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development in November 2006 and thereafter reported back to both Houses of Parliament. The Bill amends the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act 1956 (ITPA), which makes trafficking and sexual exploitation of persons for commercial purposes a punishable offence. Among other things, the Bill provides for more stringent punishment of offenders; deletes provisions relating to the prosecution of prostitutes for solicitation; defines the term “trafficking in persons” and punishes trafficking in persons, including children, for the purpose of prostitution; increases penalties for certain trafficking offences; and provides for the constitution of authorities at the central and state levels to combat trafficking.

40. Further, the Committee notes from a press release dated 20 August 2007, posted on the Internet site of the Government’s Press Information Bureau (PIB), that a pilot project on combating trafficking of women and children for sexual exploitation was being implemented; that a “Comprehensive Scheme for Prevention of Trafficking and Rescue, Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Victims of Trafficking and Commercial Sexual Exploitation” had been included in the Annual Plan, 2007–08; and that the Central Advisory Committee on Combating Child Prostitution, headed by the Secretary of the Ministry of Women and Child Development (WCD), was reviewing the States’ activities in combating trafficking and prostitution every quarter.

41. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will supply updated and detailed information on: the status of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Amendment Bill, 2006; on the progress in the implementation of pilot projects aimed at combating trafficking of women and children for commercial sexual exploitation; and on the work of the central advisory committees within relevant ministries in terms of measures to combat/prevent trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation and prostitution and to review states’ activities in this area.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee has noted the Government’s reports received in 2003 and 2004, which contain replies to its earlier comments, as well as a discussion which took place at the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards during the 91st Session of the International Labour Conference (June 2003). The Committee has also noted a communication dated 20 August 2003 received from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), which contains observations concerning the application of the Convention by India, as well as the Government’s reply to these observations received in October 2004.

Bonded labour

1. The Committee has previously referred on many occasions to the urgent need to compile accurate statistics of the number of persons who continue to suffer under bonded labour, using a valid statistical methodology, with a view to identification and release of bonded labourers. This issue is again the subject of each of the communications and discussion referred to in paragraph 1 hereof.

Government report 2003

2. The Committee has noted the Government’s report and in particular the following matters which the Government has emphasized:

-  that it has a strong will and intent to eradicate bonded labour and has the necessary machinery and infrastructure to reach down to the grassroots to do so;

­-  that, since the enactment of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, and up to 31 March 2003, 282,970 bonded labourers had been identified and 262,952 had been rehabilitated (as compared to the data provided by the Government in its 2001 report of 280,411 bonded labourers identified and 251,569 rehabilitated up to 31 March 2000);

-  that the work done in the field of identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers represents significant progress and over a period, the incidence of bonded labour system is declining;

-  that central assistance has been provided by the Government to the various state governments for conducting surveys on bonded labour in 120 districts;

-  that the figures quoted by the non-governmental agencies regarding incidence of bonded labour are not based on facts, as no appropriate statistical tools have been adopted for collecting the primary data.

ICFTU report

3. The ICFTU in its 2003 report referred to above, adverted to a number of matters including the following:

n  reiterated that the number of people identified by the Government since 1976 does not represent the total number of bonded labourers in the country. It referred to the survey conducted by the Ghandi Peace Foundation and the National Labour Institute (NLI) in 1978-79 ("the Ghandi Peace Foundation Survey"), which cited a number of 2.6 million bonded labourers, which number has been previously rejected by the Government on the grounds that the methodology of the survey was not scientific;

n  pointed out that even if an allowance was made for a significant overestimation, such as 10 per cent, the figures would still leave over 2 million bonded labourers, being considerably larger than the Government had so far identified;

n  indicated that the Ghandi Peace Foundation Survey only deals with bonded labour in agriculture and had made no estimate of the number of bonded labourers in other industries like mining, brick kilns, silk and cotton production and bidi production which is also likely to affect millions of people across India.

Conference Committee June 2003

4. The Conference Committee in the course of its discussions, urged the Government once again to adopt measures to reinforce the statistical system and to ensure the full implementation of the Convention.

Government report 2004 and response

5. The Committee has noted that in its reply to the ICFTU the Government made the following comments:

n  it denies the existence of bonded child labour in the silk industry and in cotton production in India and expresses the view that assistance provided by the children to their families in bidi production cannot be considered as bonded/forced labour;

n  it admits that some incidences of bonded/forced labour in brick kilns, quarries and mines have been reported, but such complaints are invariably sent to the concerned state government for investigation through vigilance committees, so that bonded labourers on identification are released and rehabilitated;

n  it indicates that the state government concerned is being advised by the Government of India to conduct periodic surveys for identification of bonded labourers;

n  it expresses the Government’s view that in India, which is a vast country with federal structure, having a wide range of religious, linguistic and cultural diversities, a centralized survey for identification of bonded labour may not be feasible or practicable. Hence, the central Government has been directing the state governments to conduct the surveys for identification of bonded labour at the local level with the help of their field agencies and also by taking the services of local NGOs and research institutions;

n  it again refers to the modification in May 2000 of the Centrally Sponsored Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labourers in order to provide funds to the state governments to conduct surveys on bonded labour in all sensitive districts on a regular basis once every three years.

6. While noting with interest the above information on the progress achieved, the Committee reiterates its hope that a statistical survey on bonded labour throughout the country will at last be prepared, using also the results obtained through measures taken on the state and district levels referred to above. The Committee requests the Government to communicate the surveys’ findings with its next report and also provide information on the activities of the National Human Rights Commission, which has been overseeing the progress made by the state governments in identification and rehabilitation of bonded labour.

Vigilance committees

7. The Committee has previously requested information on the functioning of vigilance committees, which the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, requires to be established to deal with the problem.

8. In relation to the operation of the vigilance committees, this Committee has noted the following:

n  the Government indicated in its 2001 report that such committees existed in 29 states and union territories; they were constituted at the district and subdivisional levels and the meetings were held regularly;

n  the Government’s response to the 2002 comments by the ICFTU (which expressed doubt as to the satisfactory functioning of these committees), that during the last six months of 2002, 221 meetings of these vigilance committees have been held and that no case of bondage had been reported;

n  the Government’s response to the 2003 comments by the ICFTU, that, for example, in the State of Punjab, there are 84 vigilance committees (17 at the district level and 67 at subdivisional level), and their meetings have been held regularly;

n  that the ILO is implementing a subregional project entitled "Preventing and Eliminating Bonded Labour in South Asia" (PEBLISA), which operates in four countries of the region, including India, and addresses the issues of release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, in particular in Tamil Nadu, through capacity building of vigilance committees at panchayat and district levels.

9. In the light of the above matters, the Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide information on the practical functioning of vigilance committees, as well as information on measures taken or envisaged to increase their efficiency.

Law enforcement

10. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to the law enforcement problem in connection with the eradication of bonded labour and sought information on the number of prosecutions, convictions and acquittals in various states under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, and also questioned the adequacy of the penalties imposed. The Committee previously observed that, in the light of Article 25 of the Convention, the number of prosecutions launched under the Act did not appear to be adequate when compared to the number of identified and released bonded labourers reported by the Government.

11. On this topic, the Committee has noted the following:

n  that, in the communication received in 2003, the ICFTU refers to comments by Anti-Slavery International, which expressed concern that "in some states the district magistrates are not functioning effectively in terms of releasing bonded labourers or ensuring the prosecution of those responsible for using bonded labourers";

n  the Government indicated in its 2003 and 2004 reports that exact information on the number of prosecutions launched for offences relating to forced/bonded labour during the period under review is not available, but the state governments have been requested to furnish the exact details in this regard, so that the authentic information is maintained;

n  the Government, in its reply to the 2003 observations by the ICFTU, received in October 2004, stated that 4,859 cases of prosecutions under the bonded labour system have been reported so far (as compared to 4,743 cases of prosecutions reported by the Government in December 2001). It expressed the view that one of the major factors for the lesser number of prosecution and conviction cases, is the Indian social and anthropological system and the psyche of the people living in the rural and informal sector of the country where an "informal system of equilibrium" is in place to cater to their needs; which also includes the system of grievances and disputes resolution through conciliation.

12. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide, in its future reports, full information on the number of prosecutions, as well as on the number of convictions and on the penalties imposed, including sample copies of relevant court decisions.

Child labour

13. The Committee previously raised a number of questions concerning efforts to eliminate child labour falling under the Convention (i.e. in conditions which are sufficiently hazardous or arduous that the work concerned cannot be counted as voluntary). The Committee has noted the following matters:

n  the Government’s indications in its 2001 and 2003 reports that census data for 1991 had estimated the number of working children in the country as 11.28 million;

n  that a survey conducted by the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) in 1999-2000 indicated the number of working children in the country at around 10.40 million, but that the results of the census held in 2001 were still awaited;

n  the ICFTU, in its communication received in June 2002, estimates that the numbers of working children in India vary between 22 million and 50 million, and that the efforts to reduce child labour have yet to have much impact and must be considered inadequate to deal with the scale of the problem, although some progress has been made;

n  the information submitted by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in June 2003 concerning the efforts made by the Government to address this issue;

n  the Government’s reply to the Committee’s previous observation received in August 2003;

n  the information concerning the enforcement of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, which provides for prosecution and punishment of employers found employing children in occupations and processes prohibited under the Act;

n  the Government’s indications in its 2003 report that inspections conducted by the enforcement agencies during the last five years identified 21,246 violations, and that prosecutions were launched in 12,348 cases resulting in 6,305 convictions;

n  the implementation of the national child labour projects (the number of which was increased to 100 in 1999), which the Government indicates are operational for the rehabilitation of 210,000 children withdrawn from work through 4,002 special schools, and about 170,000 children have so far been mainstreamed from the special schools set up under the projects into the formal education system;

n  the Government’s indication in its 2003 report that about 164 projects have been operational under the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) in various child labour endemic districts, which cover about 110,000 children;

n  that a National Conference on Child Labour was held on 22 April 2003 (with the participation of labour secretaries and labour commissioners of the states, officials of central ministries, NGOs and international organizations), paying special attention to the elimination of child labour from hazardous occupations and to the strengthening of the law enforcement machinery;

n  the Concluding Observations of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) following its examination of the report of the Government of India on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN document CRC/C/15/Add.228, 26 February 2004), which noted that it was extremely concerned at the large numbers of children involved in economic exploitation, many of whom are working in hazardous conditions, including as bonded labourers, especially in the informal sector, in household enterprises, as domestic servants and in agriculture. The Committee is further very concerned that minimum age standards for employment are rarely enforced and appropriate penalties and sanctions are not imposed to ensure that employers comply with the law. Further, that the Committee on the Rights of the Child also made recommendations that the Child Labour Act, 1986, should be amended so that household enterprises and government schools and training centres are no longer exempt from prohibitions on employing children; and that India should ratify ILO Conventions Nos. 138 and 182.

14. While noting with interest the Government’s commitment to eliminate child labour expressed both in its reports as well in the statement by the Government representative during the 2003 Conference Committee discussion, together with the Government’s efforts directed to that end, the Committee:

n  hopes that the Government will redouble its efforts in this field. This is particularly important with regard to the identification of working children and strengthening the law enforcement machinery, in order to eradicate exploitation of children, especially in hazardous occupations;

n  requests the Government to supply the results of the latest census on the number of working children in the country and in addition asks that the Government address the issue of differing statistics in its next report;

n  notes from the Government’s 2003 reports, that the examination of Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 with a view to their ratification, is under active consideration by the Government in consultation with the social partners, state governments and other relevant bodies, and that a meeting of the Tripartite Committee to examine the possibility of the ratification was held in December 2002, and looks forward to receiving further information on this subject.

Prostitution and sexual exploitation

15. In its earlier comments, the Committee welcomed the adoption of a National Plan of Action to combat trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children, among other positive measures taken by the Government, as well as the Government’s intention to review the existing legal framework including the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, the Indian Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code and the Evidence Act, with a view to making the punishment more stringent for traffickers but at the same time, more victim-friendly. However, the Committee noted from the report of the Committee on prostitution, child prostitutes and children of prostitutes (1998) that there were no reliable estimates of the extent and magnitude of trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation in India, and expressed the hope that measures will be taken to compile reliable statistics, including that concerning child prostitutes, which would contribute to the process of their rehabilitation.

16. The Committee has noted the Government’s indications in its 2003 report of a number of measures being taken, specifically:

n  a survey on trafficking has been initiated within the country to investigate the cause and behavioural aspects of all agents in trafficking, including investigation of the magnitude of the problem and estimating the number of persons involved and trafficking routes;

n  another survey has also been commissioned to estimate the extent and magnitude of the problem of prostitution in the country;

n  the statistical information supplied by the Government concerning the rescue and rehabilitation of trafficked victims in the National Capital Territory of Delhi and other states where the problem exists (Andhra Pradesh, Mumbai, Kolkata, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Rajashan, Bihar);

n  the nine innovative model projects under Grant-in-Aid at an approximate cost of Rs.4.2 million that have been sanctioned during the financial year 2002-03 for combating trafficking and rehabilitation of rescued victims, a number of support services (such as short-stay homes, crèches and family counselling centres) have been developed and awareness-raising programmes for women have been undertaken;

n  as to the review of legislation, the Government states that consultations have been initiated, pursuant to the recommendations of the Law Commission of India in its 172nd report, with regard to proposed changes, in order to make the laws more victim-friendly and to increase the punishment imposed on perpetrators.

17. The Committee notes the above information with interest and hopes that the Government will continue to provide, in its future reports, information on the action taken to combat trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children, pursuant to the National Plan of Action referred to above, and in particular, as regards the revision and development of the legislative framework and implementation of rehabilitation projects.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

1. The Committee has noted the Government’s detailed reports and their annexes received in January and August 2001, which contain replies to its earlier comments, as well as the Government’s report received in August 2002, which contains a reply to the Committee’s 2000 general observation concerning trafficking in persons. It has also noted a discussion which took place at the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards during the 89th Session of the International Labour Conference (June 2001). The Committee has further noted a communication dated 29 August 2001 received from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), which contained comments from the Anti-Slavery International on the application of the Convention in India, as well as the Government’s reply to these comments. It has also noted the comments made by the National Front of Indian Trade Unions (NFITU) annexed to the Government’s 2001 and 2002 reports.

2. The Committee notes two new communications dated 11 June and 2 September 2002, received from the ICFTU, which contain observations concerning the application of the Convention by India. It notes that these communications have been sent to the Government on 29 July and 2 October 2002, for such comments as might be considered appropriate. The Committee hopes that the Government will supply its comments on the above observations with its next report.

Bonded labour

3. In its earlier comments, the Committee repeatedly referred to the urgent need to compile accurate statistics of the number of persons who continue to suffer under bonded labour, using a valid statistical methodology, with a view to identification and release of bonded labourers. It has noted that, according to the data provided in the 2001 Government’s reports, since the enactment of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 up to 31 March 2000, 280,411 bonded labourers have been identified and 251,569 have been rehabilitated. However, according to the communication received from the ICFTU in June 2002, the vast majority of estimates for the number of forced labourers in India range between 5 million and, according to recent research from the Anti-Slavery International, the much higher figure of 20 million. In the communication transmitted by the ICFTU, the Anti-Slavery International is stressing the necessity for a comprehensive national survey to be carried out to identify the total number of bonded labourers in the country, utilizing the services of an independent body to assist in developing the methodology and conducting the survey.

4. The Committee has noted the Government’s repeated statement in its reports that it has rejected the findings of the survey conducted by the Gandhi Peace Foundation and the National Labour Institute (NLI) in 1978-79 which cited a number of 2.6 million bonded labourers, since, in the Government’s view, the methodology of the survey was not scientific. The Government also states that the process of identification of bonded labourers is fraught with problems and difficulties; it is not like a mere headcount that can be routinely done through any other survey, but rather a difficult task which requires extraordinary efforts keeping in mind the delicate social and psychological condition of the victims. According to the Government’s view, bonded labour is a dynamic problem; existence of the bonded labour system can occur and reoccur at any point of time in any industry/occupation, which requires continuous vigilance and surveillance, as well as institutional arrangements. Having previously noted the Government’s indication that identification and release of bonded labourers is the direct responsibility of state governments concerned, as well as certain reluctance of state governments to participate in such efforts, the Committee urged the Government to take effective measures to ensure that they would participate in an early and concentrated effort to do so. It has noted from the Government’s 2001 report, as well as from the statement by the Government representative during the Conference Committee discussion in 2001, that surveys were conducted by all state governments during October-December 1996, on the basis of which seven state governments had reported identification of 28,916 bonded labourers through the affidavits filed in the Supreme Court. It has also noted from the statement by the Government representative during the Conference Committee discussion that there were 172 sensitive districts in 13 states where incidents of bonded labour were reported frequently. In this connection, the Committee has noted with interest the positive measures described by the Government, such as the modification in May 2000 of the Centrally Sponsored Plan Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour, under which 100 per cent financial assistance will be provided to state governments to conduct surveys on bonded labour in each sensitive district on a regular basis once every three years; grants will also be provided for the awareness-generation activities and evaluatory studies (five studies every year by each state government) to study the impact of existing land-debt related issues affecting bonded labourers and the impact of poverty alleviation programmes and financial assistance provided under various government programmes. The Government indicates in its 2001 report that, during the current financial year (2001-02) surveys on bonded labour are being conducted in a total of 57 districts, the remaining state governments being requested to send their proposals for conducting such surveys; the surveys’ findings shall be reported to the Ministry of Labour.

5. While noting this information and recognizing difficulties described by the Government regarding the preparation of survey for identification of bonded labour, the Committee points out once again that accurate data is a vital step in both the development of the most effective systems to combat bonded labour and providing a true base for the assessment of effectiveness of those systems. Noting also the conclusions of the discussion in the Conference Committee, in which the Conference Committee urged the Government once again to undertake a statistical survey on bonded labour throughout the country, using a valid methodology in cooperation with employers’ and workers’ organizations and with human rights’ organizations and institutions, the Committee hopes that such survey will at last be prepared (using also the results obtained through measures taken on the state and district levels referred to above). Please also continue to provide information on the application in practice of the revised Centrally Sponsored Plan Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour referred to above.

6. In its earlier comments, the Committee requested information on the functioning of vigilance committees, which the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, requires to be established to deal with the problem. According to the information provided by the Government in its 2001 report, such committees are in existence in 29 states and union territories; they have been constituted at the district and subdivisional levels and the meetings are held regularly. The Committee has noted, however, that, in response to the comments by the Anti-Slavery International, transmitted by the ICFTU, in which satisfactory functioning of these committees was doubted, the Government recognized that in some instances vigilance committees were not able to meet regularly, considering the huge number of districts in the country and many other functions of district functionaries, though such instances were exceptions and not the rule. The Committee hopes that greater clarification of this issue will be provided by the Government in its next report, as well as information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure that vigilance committees are functioning effectively.

7. As regards other initiatives taken by the Government to eradicate bonded labour throughout the country, the Committee has noted with interest the following action: the increase of rehabilitation grant from Rs10,000 to Rs20,000 for each released bonded labourer, as a result of a modification of the Centrally Sponsored Plan Scheme for Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour; field visits of senior officials (between July 1999 and April 2000) to monitor the utilization of funds released for the rehabilitation of bonded labour, as well as to review and monitor progress made in the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976; regular review meetings held by the Ministry of Labour with state government representatives (the latest one was held in February 2002) to review the implementation of the 1976 Act and the Scheme; the efforts of the National Human Rights Commission to oversee and supervise the implementation of the 1976 Act on the instructions of the Supreme Court of India.

8. While noting the above information with interest, the Committee again points out that more than 25 years after the adoption of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, the system of bonded labour still exists in the country, and that the Government’s efforts to eradicate it should be pursued with vigour. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide detailed information on the action taken.

9. In its earlier comments, the Committee referred to the law enforcement problem in connection with the eradication of bonded labour and sought information on the number of prosecutions, convictions and acquittals in various states under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, also questioning the adequacy of the penalties imposed. The Committee has noted the comments by the NFITU, annexed to the Government’s 2001 report, in which the union stressed that one of the reasons of the existence of bonded labour is that the law enforcement machinery is not functioning properly and effectively. It has also noted that, in comments transmitted by the ICFTU, the Anti-Slavery International expressed concern about "a widespread failure to prosecute those found to be using bonded labourers". According to the Government’s reply to these comments, since the enactment of the 1976 Act, 4,743 cases of prosecutions have been reported under the Act, though the information on convictions and sentences passed in each case is not available, since the collection of such information is likely to be very time consuming and difficult. The Committee observes that, in the light of Article 25 of the Convention, the number of prosecutions launched under the Act appears to be inadequate in comparison with the numbers of identified and released bonded labourers reported by the Government. The Committee therefore hopes that appropriate measures will be taken with a view to initiating prosecutions against perpetrators and that the Government will provide information on the number of convictions and on the penalties imposed, including sample copies of relevant court decisions. Effective prosecution and penalties must form part of a cohesive approach to combat bonded labour.

Child labour

10. In its earlier comments, the Committee raised a number of questions concerning efforts to eliminate child labour falling under the Convention (i.e. in conditions which are sufficiently hazardous or arduous that the work concerned cannot be counted as voluntary). In this connection, the Committee noted information from the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) on the matter, and the Concluding Observations of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) following its examination of the report of the Government of India on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN doc. CRC/C/15/add.15, 23 February 2000), in which the United Nations Committee expressed concern "at the large numbers of children involved in child labour, including bonded labour, especially in the informal sector, household enterprises, as domestic servants, and in agriculture, many of whom are working in hazardous conditions"; it was also concerned that "minimum age standards for employment are rarely enforced and appropriate penalties and sanctions are not imposed to ensure that employers comply with the law".

11. The Committee has before it observations from the ICFTU on this and other points, received in June 2002 and transmitted to the Government in July 2002, to which the Government has not yet replied. According to these observations, estimates of the numbers of working children in India vary between 22 million and 50 million, and the efforts to reduce child labour have yet to have much impact and must be considered inadequate to deal with the scale of the problem, although some progress have been made. The Government indicated in its 2001 report that the census data for 1991 had estimated the number of working children in the country as 11.28 million, and that the results of the census held early in 2001 were still awaited. The Committee hopes that the Government will respond to the above observations in its next report and supply the results of the latest census.

12. The Committee has noted the information submitted by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in June 2001 concerning the efforts made by the Government to address this issue, as well as the Government’s reply to the Committee’s previous observation received in August 2001. It has taken note of the following information:

-  that, as a result of direct actions taken by the Ministry of Labour in compliance with the directions of the Supreme Court in its judgement of 10 December 1996, 130,210 children have been identified as employed in hazardous occupations and 392,139 children as employed in non-hazardous occupations in 30 reporting states and union territories as on 31 March 2001; child labour rehabilitation and welfare funds have been constituted at the district level by state governments concerned and, besides taking action for collection of compensation (Rs20,000 per child employed by the offending employer), penal action has also been initiated against the employers;

-  that, under a notification issued on 10 May 2001, six more processes in the hazardous category were added to the Schedule of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, bringing the total to 13 occupations and 57 processes (the number of hazardous occupations remained unchanged);

-  that, at the instance of Ministry of Labour, the Central Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1984 and All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1961 have been amended by notifications of 14 October 1999 and 1 February 2000 prohibiting employment of children below the age of 14 by civil servants; the amendments will also be incorporated by state governments in the State Government Civil Service (Conduct) Rules;

-  that, the implementation of the National Child Labour Projects (the number of which was increased up to 100 in 1999) is being monitored regularly through a central monitoring committee, which includes representatives from the central Government and the labour secretaries of state governments;

-  that, altogether, 160 action programmes have been taken up for implementation under the IPEC programme during 1992 to 2000; the total number of children covered is 90,574;

-  that, a national conference on child labour was held in New Delhi on 22 January 2001, paying special attention to the elimination of child labour from hazardous occupations and to the strengthening of the law enforcement machinery.

13. While noting the above information, as well as the Government’s commitment to eliminate child labour expressed by the Government representative during the 2001 Conference Committee discussion, the Committee hopes that the Government will pursue its efforts in this field, particularly as regards the identification of working children and strengthening the law enforcement machinery, in order to eradicate exploitation of children, especially in hazardous occupations. It asks the Government to provide detailed information on these matters in its next report.

14. As regards, more particularly, child labour in the unorganized sector, the Government indicates in its 2001 report that it has no intention to extend the coverage of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, and the Factories Act, 1948, since, in the Government’s view, child labour cannot be eliminated through coercive and inspectoral mechanisms, but rather through a holistic, integrated and convergent approach that takes care of a child’s physical and mental development through effective and rigorous attempts at reducing the poverty of the family by implementing developmental schemes strongly and effectively. As regards the Factories Act, the Government considers that it would be logistically and financially not possible to cover units of all sizes and workshops for the purpose of eliminating of child labour. The Committee points out in this connection, having noted also the recommendations contained in the Concluding Observations of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child referred to above, that developing and reinforcing the legislative provisions and strengthening the law enforcement mechanism are vital, along with the measures of socio-economic character, for the effective eradication of child labour. It hopes that appropriate action will be taken to enlarge the scope of the legislation and asks the Government to continue to provide information on measures taken to address child labour in the unorganized sectors, i.e. in small-scale units not yet covered by the Factories Act, in cottage industries, particularly in such occupations as are hazardous to the child.

15. The Committee has noted from the Government’s 2001 report, as well as from the statement by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in 2001, that the examination of Conventions Nos. 138 and 182 with a view to their ratification has already been started and that an inter-ministerial meeting to discuss the implications of ratifying Convention No. 182 has been held. The Committee hopes that the Government will keep the ILO informed of the developments.

Prostitution and sexual exploitation

16. The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments in its 2001 and 2002 reports and in the statement by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in June 2001, as well as the report of the Committee on prostitution, child prostitutes and children of prostitutes (1998), prepared by the Department of Women and Child Development of the Ministry of Human Resources Development, supplied by the Government. It has noted, in particular, the following positive measures taken by the Government:

-  drawing up a national plan of action (1998) to combat trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children;

-  constitution of a national advisory committee, as well as state advisory committees, to combat trafficking and rehabilitate victims of trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation; the Government is also planning to establish a central cell in the Ministry of Home Affairs with a view to monitoring and coordinating the action taken by various national agencies and programmes for the prevention, rescue and rehabilitation of women and children victims;

-  establishment of protective homes under section 21 of the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, 1956, exclusively for girls and women detained under the Act and also for those who seek protection from being forced into prostitution;

-  reviewing the existing legal framework including the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, the Indian Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code and the Evidence Act, with a view to make the punishment more stringent for traffickers, while making the laws more victim-friendly;

-  enacting legislation to prohibit Devdasi and Jogin traditions of sexual exploitation (in states of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Maharashtra);

-  implementation of projects for rehabilitation of Devdasis, Jogins, women victims under various schemes for training and employment of women, like the Support for Training and Employment Programme (STEP);

-  conducting of surveys in several states with a view to identification of Devdasis/Jogins women and their rehabilitation;

-  ratification by India of the International Protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children and signing of the SAARC Convention on combating trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children.

17. The Committee welcomes the abovementioned actions and the Government’s commitment to address the problem. However, it notes from the report of the Committee on prostitution, child prostitutes and children of prostitutes referred to above that, "though there are a number of studies and reports on commercial sexual exploitation of women and children, there are no reliable estimates of the extent and magnitude of trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation in India". The Committee hopes that, in spite of the obstacles in trying to estimate the magnitude of the problem, described by the Government, measures will be taken to compile reliable statistics, including that concerning child prostitutes, which would contribute to the process of their rehabilitation. It also asks the Government to continue to provide information on the action taken to combat trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation of women and children, and in particular, as regards the revision and development of the legislative framework and implementation of rehabilitation projects.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2003.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

1.  The Committee notes the information provided orally by the Government to the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards at its 88th (June 2000) Session, following its previous comments, though it regrets the Government has not communicated a written report for examination at its present session in response to the long discussion in the Conference Committee. It hopes the Government will shortly submit a written report, which will provide detailed information in response to the following comments.

Bonded labour

2.  The Committee recalls that it has referred on many occasions to the urgent need to compile accurate statistics of the number of persons who continue to suffer under bonded labour, using a valid statistical methodology, with a view to identification and release of these persons. It recalled that estimates vary between the 280,340 identified by the Government as of 31 March 1999, and some ten million estimated still to exist by non-governmental organizations. Other official information generated within India has referred in the past to much higher numbers than those cited recently by the Government, for instance the survey conducted by the Ghandi Peace Foundation and the National Labour Institute in 1978-79 which cited a number of 2.6 million. Noting the reluctance of state governments within the country to participate in such efforts, the Committee again urges the Government to take effective measures to ensure that they will participate in an early and concerted effort to do so. It notes, for instance, offers recently made by the central Government to states to provide funding to identify districts where bonded labour still exists, examining the reasons for its continued existence and examining ways to abolish the practice; and the slowness or absence of responses to this proposal. The Committee also notes that the Conference Committee urged the Government to undertake a comprehensive and authoritative survey.

3.  The Government has referred once again to the technical difficulty of identifying bonded labourers. The Committee notes the reference by the Government during the Conference Committee discussion to a recent Supreme Court decision which ruled that when a labourer supplies labour free, it may be presumed that he or she was obliged to do so due to a loan or some other exploitative economic arrangement. The Government representative stated that this judgement had been communicated to the districts and subdivisions, and that it was hoped it would facilitate the release of bonded labourers. The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the judgement, and to indicate whether it has been put into effect at the state level in helping to identify bonded labourers.

4.  In the absence of a written report, the Committee has no information available in response to its previous requests for information on further action, including release of bonded labourers in several states during 1998-99 referred to in the previous report; a proposal that was being processed in consultation with the Ministry of Finance to provide funds to all released bonded labourers; deputizing senior officials to visit certain areas to review and monitor progress made in implementing the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976; review meetings held between the Ministry of Labour and state governments, et al. The Committee therefore repeats the request it made in its previous observation for written information on the progress achieved on all these matters.

5.  The Committee also hopes that an ILO project developed as a direct response to the recently adopted Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182), and the recent ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, will be of assistance to the Government in combating bonded labour. The project is for an initial period of three years, and is designed to induce existing microfinance institutions to develop, test and offer tailor-made savings and loan products to vulnerable families on the verge of becoming bonded, or already bonded, or, after their release, to support rehabilitation.

Child labour

6.  The Committee recalls that in its previous observation it raised a number of questions concerning efforts to eliminate child labour falling under the present Convention (i.e. in conditions which are sufficiently hazardous or arduous that the work concerned cannot be counted as voluntary). The Committee had before it observations from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions on this and other points, to which the Government had not replied. It notes the assurances given at the Conference Committee in June 2000 concerning the efforts being made by the Government to address this issue, but it again requests the Government to provide replies to the various points put in that observation, which read in relevant part as follows:

8.  As regards child labour, the Committee notes ... information from the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) on the matter, and the Government’s report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (document CRC/C/28/Add.10, 7 July 1997).

…

11.  The Committee notes the indication in the Anti-Slavery International communication [Note: received from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, and therefore receivable by the Committee] that many small production units - with fewer than ten persons where no electric power is in use, or fewer than 20 where electric power is used - are not subject to inspections under the Factories Act, 1948. Such units, for instance in "pappad" (appalam) production or in certain tanneries, employ children, directly or indirectly, and also as bonded labourers.

12.  The Committee asks the Government to:

-  comment on the abovementioned Anti-Slavery International communication and also to indicate what measures have been taken to address child labour in the unorganized sectors, i.e. in small-scale units not covered by the Factories Act, in cottage industries, particularly in such occupations as are hazardous to the child;

-  report on an assessment of the impact of the Notification of 27 January 1999 extending the list of hazardous occupations and processes of the Schedule of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986;

-  communicate copies of reports by the National Authority on Elimination of Child Labour, on actions taken to eliminate child labour, particularly child bonded labour;

-  provide information on how effect is being given to the directions of the Supreme Court in its judgement referred to above.

7.  In addition, the Committee notes the Concluding Observations of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) following its examination of the report of the Government of India on the Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN doc. CRC/C/15/Add.15, 23 February 2000). That Committee notes, inter alia, that it "remains concerned at the large numbers of children involved in child labour, including bonded labour, especially in the informal sector, household enterprises, as domestic servants, and in agriculture, many of whom are working in hazardous conditions. The Committee is concerned that minimum age standards for employment are rarely enforced and appropriate penalties and sanctions are not imposed to ensure that employers comply with the law". The Committee on the Rights of the Child makes a number of recommendations, which the present Committee can only share: that the 1986 Child Labour Act 1986 be amended so that household enterprises and government schools and training centres are no longer exempt from prohibitions on employing children; that the Factories Act, 1948 be amended to cover all factories or workshops employing child labour; and that the Beedi Act be amended so that exemptions for household-based production are eliminated. The CRC goes on to make other recommendations, including that India ratify ILO Conventions Nos. 138 and 182.

8.  The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on all these matters.

Prostitution and sexual exploitation

9.  In its previous comments the Committee posed a series of questions and requested detailed information in reply. While the Government did not submit a written report, the Government representative at the Conference Committee in June 2000 expressed the opinion that Indian legislation was fully in accordance with Convention No. 29, but indicated that the general level of poverty and unemployment in the country might result in the exploitation of children despite these legal measures. He indicated that it was therefore necessary to strengthen enforcement mechanisms so that all complaints would be properly investigated and all offences punished. He also referred to a survey conducted by the Central Social Welfare Board in six cities, which had found that there were 70,000-100,000 prostitutes in India and that 30 per cent of this number were under 20 years of age. He spoke of a strategy to improve the economic resources of families and to conduct an awareness-raising campaign to alert the public to this problem. Finally, he noted that the Provincial Government of Uttar Pradesh had commissioned a study on child prostitution and stated that the study would be made available to the ILO once it was completed.

10.  The Committee once expresses the firm hope that the Government will take firm measures on an urgent basis to combat the various kinds of forced labour still extant in the country, and that it will continue to submit written as well as oral reports to the ILO on these efforts. It remains particularly important to mobilize both central and provincial governments in this effort, and to mobilize both the financial and political resources necessary to accomplish the work that needs to be done.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2001.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the Government's detailed responses contained in the report of 18 August 1999 and its annexes and also the report dated 5 November 1999 which responds to the matters raised by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) communications dated 23 September and 11 October 1999. The Committee further notes the Government's most recent information in its communication of 3 December 1999.

The three important topics of forced labour which are referred to in the above material concern bonded labour, and also the vulnerable position of children forced by dire economic and other factors to work in industries, occupations or processes in the formal and informal sectors, as well as children being used for prostitution purposes.

Bonded labour

1. The Committee notes that one of the controversial issues on this topic concerns the reliability of statistics on the number of bonded labourers in India. Criticisms have been made in the communication by Anti-Slavery International, transmitted by the ICFTU, stressing the necessity for a comprehensive survey to be carried out on bonded labour. In urging such action, Anti-Slavery International refers to the similar recommendation made by the United Nations Human Rights Committee at its Sixtieth Session (Geneva, 1997) in paragraph 29 of its report in which that Committee recommended that a "thorough study be urgently undertaken". The estimates given on the numbers of bonded labourers in India have varied from an estimated 10 million by Anti-Slavery International, to 5 to 10 million referred to by Employer members at the Eighty-Sixth Session of the International Labour Conference (Geneva, 1998), to 280,340 identified by the Government as at 31 March 1999.

2. The Government also stated that since the enactment of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, up to March 1999, 280,340 bonded labourers have been identified by the state governments, 243,375 have been released and rehabilitated, about 20,000 have either died or migrated to other parts and 17,000 are in the process of being rehabilitated. The Government also indicated that, out of 24,918 bonded labourers identified in Tamil Nadu, as of 31 March 1999, action has been initiated to release and rehabilitate 11,578 bonded labourers. The Government also refers to surveys conducted by state governments during October-December 1996 in pursuance of Supreme Court directions and to 23,916 bonded labourers identified. The Government indicates that its statistics are based on detailed surveys carried out by the state governments concerned, and that these are more authentic and realistic figures based on grass roots-level work.

3. The Committee recognizes that the compiling of accurate data can be difficult. It is rendered more difficult by the federal nature of government and the difficulties of coordination with local regions. There is also the problem that bonded labour is often hidden. The users make efforts to disguise its operation and the victims are sometimes so scared and oppressed that they are unwilling to admit its existence.

4. Whilst recognizing these difficulties, the Committee is also concerned about the disparity of statistics over the years and urges that the Government undertake a comprehensive survey using a valid statistical methodology to be also broken down by gender. The Committee encourages the Government to utilize the services of an independent body to assist in developing the methodology and conducting the survey. The Committee notes that the Government had previously performed the 1978-79 survey under the joint auspices of the Gandhi Peace Foundation and the National Labour Institute. The Committee emphasizes that accurate data are a vital step in both the development of the most effective systems to combat the problem of bonded labour as well as providing a true base for the assessment of effectiveness of those systems.

5. With regard to the initiatives taken by the Government to eradicate bonded labour throughout the country, the Committee notes from the Government's report that the action includes the following:

-- that during 1998-99, 5,960 bonded labourers have been rehabilitated under the centrally sponsored scheme in the States of Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Orissa;

-- that with regard to rehabilitation, there is a government proposal to grant Rs.20,000 as subsidy to each bonded labourer, which is now being processed in consultation with the Ministry of Finance. Further, other benefits are available under different anti-poverty programmes such as Indira Awas,Yojna, National Rural Employment Programme (NREP), Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP), and the old-age pension, etc. to assist freed bonded labourers for their effective rehabilitation;

-- that senior officials have been deputized to visit certain areas during August 1998 to February 1999 to review and monitor the progress made by the state governments in the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, and the Bonded Labour Rehabilitation Scheme, 1978. The Committee also noted the copies of instructions and guidelines given to officers of the state governments;

-- that review meetings were held regularly at the central level by the Ministry of Labour with the state government representatives, the latest of which was held in December 1998. At the December meeting, it was decided to conduct fresh surveys to identify bonded labour, to make various arrangements after identification, such as issuing release certificates, repatriation in the case of migrant workers, etc., and to formulate proposals for rehabilitation, as well as to initiate action against the employers under the provisions of the Act. State government representatives had been requested to ensure the constitution of vigilance committees at district and subdivisional levels, as required under section 13 of the Act, to convene such committee meetings regularly and to maintain close and constant surveillance on the occurrence and recurrence of bonded labour in their area. Further to that meeting, other meetings were held with state governments of Tamil Nadu, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh in March and July 1999. In these meetings, state governments were advised to conduct periodic surveys through their existing machinery and also to indicate specific areas to be surveyed, the agencies to be selected and methodology to be adopted;

-- that the subject of bonded labour has been reviewed as a human rights issue by the Supreme Court of India, which by an order given on 11 November 1997 in Writ of Petition No. 3922/85, has directed the National Human Rights Commission to oversee and supervise the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, and the progress made by the state governments in this regard. In pursuance of this direction, a central action group was constituted in August 1998, under the chairmanship of a former Chief Justice of India. That group has held four meetings and has appointed special rapporteurs.

6. The Committee welcomes this information but at the same time observes that 20 years after the adoption of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, the system of bonded labour still exists and therefore enjoins the Government to continue to pursue its eradication with vigour.

7. The Committee asks the Government to:

-- send updated and detailed statistical information on the identification, the release and the rehabilitation of bonded labourers, as well as a copy of the periodic surveys conducted by state governments, particularly those mentioned above;

-- forward copies of the reports by the senior officials who reviewed and monitored the progress made by the state governments in the implementation of the legislation on bonded labour, as mentioned by the Government, so that the Committee may assess the situation and the efforts made at the different levels of government;

-- forward copies of the reports on the review meetings regularly held at the central level by the Ministry of Labour with the state government representatives, particularly the December 1998 meeting and any further meeting. In addition, the Committee also asks the Government to indicate how the application of the decisions taken at the December 1998 meeting are monitored, and what was the outcome, in practice, of the decisions to initiate action against employers under the Act and to ensure that these are effective and properly constituted vigilance committees, including some independent persons, at district and subdivisional levels;

-- forward copies of the reports on the meetings held with state governments of Tamil Nadu, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh in March and July 1999;

-- communicate copies of any reports on bonded labour by the Human Rights Commission, the Central Action Group and the special rapporteurs appointed by them;

-- finally, following on its previous observation, the Committee again asks the Government to communicate details on measures and programmes pursued in cooperation with workers' and employers' organizations at the national and local levels.

Child labour

8. As regards child labour, the Committee notes the information in the Government's report, and in the communication by Anti-Slavery International transmitted by the ICFTU. It appears that the Government's response to the ICFTU observations do not address the issue of child labour. The Committee also notes information from the International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) on the matter, and the Government's report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (document CRC/C/28/Add.10, 7 July 1997).

9. The Committee takes note of the indications in the Government's report:

-- that with respect to industries, about 106,000 children have been identified as having been employed in hazardous industries. About 400,000 children have been employed in non-hazardous industries and been brought into formal systems of education as a rehabilitation measure;

-- that a notification was issued on 27 January 1999 to add six more occupations and 33 processes to the Schedule of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, bringing the total to 13 occupations and 51 processes;

-- that 12 national child labour projects were started in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh as well as 76 projects, covering 150,000 children, under national child labour schemes;

-- that the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) on 20 January 1999 approved an increase in the national child labour projects from 76 to 100, which is anticipated to benefit about 200,000 working children through rehabilitation;

-- that during 1998-99, 130 projects were approved for coverage of 90,574 children. It also notes that the continuation of the national child labour projects for the duration of the Ninth Plan has been approved;

-- that the Government has initiated steps for giving effect to the directions of the Supreme Court in its judgement dated 10 December 1996 in Writ of Petition No. 465 of 1986. In this respect the Committee notes that the Supreme Court reiterated its earlier decision concerning free and compulsory education up to the age of 14 years and also directed that the employer who employed a child in contravention with the provisions of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, shall pay as compensation a sum of Rs.20.000 per child to be deposited in a special rehabilitation fund.

10. The Committee welcomes the abovementioned actions and acknowledges the Government's statement that it is totally committed to the elimination of child labour, and that the efforts of the Government are to implement all child labour and other related laws in a sustained manner to prevent exploitation of children.

11. The Committee notes the indication in the Anti-Slavery International communication that many small production units - with fewer than ten persons where no electric power is in use, or fewer than 20 where electric power is used - are not subject to inspections under the Factories Act, 1948. Such units, for instance in "pappad" (appalam) production or in certain tanneries, employ children, directly or indirectly, and also as bonded labourers.

12. The Committee asks the Government to:

-- comment on the abovementioned Anti-Slavery International communication and also to indicate what measures have been taken to address child labour in the unorganized sectors, i.e. in small-scale units not covered by the Factories Act, in cottage industries, particularly in such occupations as are hazardous to the child;

-- report on an assessment of the impact of the Notification of 27 January 1999 extending the list of hazardous occupations and processes of the Schedule of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation ) Act, 1986;

-- communicate copies of reports by the National Authority on Elimination of Child Labour, on actions taken to eliminate child labour, particularly child bonded labour;

-- provide information on how effect is being given to the directions of the Supreme Court in its judgement referred to above.

Prostitution and sexual exploitation

13. The Committee in its previous observations commented on the sexual exploitation of children. The Committee had noted that a survey had been entrusted to the Tata Institute of Social Sciences and that its results would be communicated to the ILO. The Committee notes the brief mention in the Government's report as to steps taken by state governments in preventing and combating the problem of prostitution, child prostitutes and children of prostitutes.

14. The Committee notes that the report of the Committee on the Rights of the Child refers to there being no reliable statistics available about the number of prostitutes - least of all about child prostitutes - and that "no estimates are available even about the number of child Devadasis and Joginis, though these systems have been traditionally in existence as a socially sanctioned form of exploitation of women, particularly those from lower socio-economic groups in the States of Karnataka, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh". It also notes that the Government has constituted a Central Advisory Committee to frame recommendations and a plan of action for the rescue and rehabilitation of child prostitutes.

15. The Committee asks the Government to provide full and detailed information on this issue, by communicating a copy of the abovementioned survey, by providing information on action taken with respect to child Devadasis and Joginis in the States of Karantaka, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh as well as a copy of the recommendations of the Central Advisory Committee, and information on the implementation of their plan of action concerning the rescue and rehabilitation of child prostitutes.

The Committee would appreciate a comprehensive and fully documented report by the Government on the abovementioned points.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

1. In its previous observations, the Committee has examined several aspects of the application of Articles 1(1) and 2(1) of the Convention, relating in particular to the issue of bonded labour, especially of children; and including the question of penal sanctions for the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour, as required by Article 25 of the Convention. The Committee has noted the detailed discussion of this issue in the Conference Committee in 1998, in which the importance of obtaining better information as to the extent of the illegal bonded labour was underlined, as was the need for more effective enforcement measures. Special concern was again expressed as to the bonded labour and sexual exploitation of children.

2. The Government's report was received by the Office shortly before the Committee's session in November 1998. The report acknowledges the seriousness of the problem, but places it in the context of India's developing economy, with widespread unemployment, poverty and illiteracy. It provides copies of judgements of the Supreme Court relating to bonded labour, particularly as concerns the continuing problem of the lack of reliable information from the central and state Governments, and certain statistics of inspections carried out and bonded labourers rehabilitated. It refers to the role of the National Human Rights Commission and district-level vigilance committees. The Government says that trade unions have not played a leading role in respect of this problem so far, although it would welcome their involvement -- as it does that of voluntary agencies. The Government also replies to the Committee's previous direct request.

3. The Committee has noted further the comments of the National Front of Indian Trade Unions (NFITU), which stresses the adverse effects of economic liberalization and globalization in terms of shortage of work and the willingness of the poorest to submit to any kind of pressure to secure some employment. It calls for a huge effort to combat the causes of forced or compulsory labour, which lie in socio-economic injustices exacerbated by unrestricted population growth, and also for heavy punitive measures to enforce the laws.

4. The Committee recalls the longstanding dialogue on this Convention both through its own comments and in the Conference Committee. It welcomes the more detailed information provided by the Government, although because of the report's late arrival the Committee has not had the opportunity to examine the details as it would wish. The Committee also notes with interest, with regard to the Government's and the NFITU's reference to the more general unemployment problem, that India has ratified the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), thereby committing itself to the declaration and pursuit of a policy of full, productive and freely-chosen employment.

5. The Committee intends to return in particular to a consideration of the judgements referred to at its next session. In the meantime, it reiterates its view, echoed by the Conference and the Government, that cooperation with the ILO's International Programme for the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) offers a real opportunity to address the problems of application of the Convention as regards children. It hopes the Government will send further statistical information as it becomes available concerning bonded labour, as well as details of measures and programmes pursued in cooperation with workers' and employers' and other organizations at the national and local levels. It looks forward also in due course to information as to the development, perhaps in cooperation with the responsible advisory services of the ILO, of a national policy in terms of Convention No. 122 which includes the goal of free choice of employment as well as the abolition of forced or compulsory labour. It requests the Government to provide any available new information in time for its next session.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1999.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

1. The Committee refers to its observation on the application of this Convention.

2. In its previous direct request the Committee referred to an observation made on the application of the Convention by the National Labour Federation of Pakistan, alleging that the Indian Army imposes forced labour on civilians in Kashmir. The Committee notes the statement in the Government's report that these allegations are totally false and baseless.

3. The Committee refers to its previous comments concerning the possibility for armed forces personnel to leave the service in time of peace, on their own initiative, without consideration of individual merits, provided they have served a specified minimum period and give notice of reasonable length. It notes the Government's statement in its report that premature retirement or resignation is not permitted except on certain exceptional grounds, which are listed, and that it is not proposed to adopt any measures allowing them to do so.

4. The Committee again refers to the explanations provided in paragraphs 33, 68, 72 and 73 of its 1979 General Survey on the abolition of forced labour. It recalls that service in the armed forces, apart from compulsory military service under conscription laws, is covered by the Convention in particular when it results from voluntary enlistment. It therefore asks the Government to re-examine the question with a view to bringing provisions on service in the armed forces into line with the requirements of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

1. The Committee recalls that the application of this Convention by India has been examined on a number of occasions by the present Committee and in the Conference Committee, most recently in 1995. It notes the detailed information submitted by the Government representative at that time, as well as the report received in October 1996, too late to be considered at the Committee's previous session. It recalls that the Conference Committee stated that in the light of the discussion and its conclusions over a number of years, and in light of the inadequate progress which had been made, it was deeply concerned over the situation and urged the Government to adopt effective measures to eliminate bonded labour.

Identification of bonded labourers and magnitude of the problem

2. Since many years this continues to be a disputed issue. The Committee has previously noted that the Government has carried out no comprehensive survey of the magnitude of the problem, but that it estimates that there are some 256,000 bonded labourers in the country, based on the number that have been identified and freed; no estimate is provided by the Government of the number that may yet remain in bondage. Other estimates, in particular by non-governmental organizations such as the Bonded Labour Liberation Front, refer to as many as 5 million adult bonded labourers and 10 million child bonded labourers, or even higher; while estimates by other reputable observers range between these two figures. The Committee expressed concern in its previous report that work to be undertaken by the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) on the proposal of the Ministry of Labour to gather information on bonded labour was not scheduled before 1998-99; and as indicated below it notes that the Government has still not decided whether a comprehensive survey needs to be undertaken.

3. The Committee also notes in this connection the final observations of the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations (CCPR/C/79/Add.81, 4 August 1997) on considering the state report of India on the observance of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which stated:

29. The Committee expresses concern at the extent of bonded labour, as well as the fact that the incidence of this practice reported to the Supreme Court is far higher than is mentioned in the report. The Committee also notes with concern that eradication measures which have been taken do not appear to be effective in achieving real progress in the release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. Therefore the Committee recommends that a thorough study be urgently undertaken to identify the extent of bonded labour and that more effective measures be taken to eradicate this practice, in accordance with the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act of 1976 and Article 8 of the Covenant.

4. Among the issues in this connection is the division of responsibility between the central and state governments. The Government has indicated that it is the responsibility of the states to identify and release bonded labourers, and in each of its last several reports it has referred to consultations undertaken between the Ministry of Labour and the state labour authorities. In its previous report it referred to meetings held in 1993 in which it was decided to constitute a committee of labour secretaries to study and recommend a workable definition of bonded labour and the modalities and procedures for the rehabilitation of those identified. The Government indicated in 1995 that the report of the committee of labour secretaries had been received, but did not supply a copy to the ILO; in its latest report it states that the report is still under study and that the Government is yet to make a final decision. It has however stated that the surveys were proposed on the basis of the existing definition in the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, and not on any fresh definition that may be accepted by the Government at some future date.

5. The Committee notes that, as earlier indicated, the state governments have all taken a stand that there are no more bonded labourers to be identified, released and rehabilitated in their states, and they have reiterated this in the Supreme Court. In March 1995 the Supreme Court issued interim orders appointing an advocate and a voluntary organization in each of 13 states to verify their claims and to determine whether the practice of bonded labour has actually been eliminated. The Government states in its report that it is awaiting the outcome of this case "before taking a final decision on the need for a fresh all-India survey to discover the existence of bonded labourers, if any".

6. The Committee takes due note of this information, and asks the Government to communicate a copy of the decision of the Supreme Court, and of any interim decisions it may make on this matter, as soon as possible. It notes that, while no information has yet been received from the Government, the Office has received communications under article 23 of the Constitution, from one of the voluntary organizations appointed, the Mahabugnagar District Palamoori Contract Labour Union, in May 1996 and May 1997. The Office has communicated copies of these communications to the Government and requested it to provide comments on them for the Committee's consideration, but no reply to either of them has been received from the Government. Both communications indicate that this organization, one of several working on the problem, has reported to the Supreme Court the existence of bonded labour in specified circumstances, and included reports of the release by magistrates of some of the bonded labourers identified. It reports that a large number of cases of bonded labour are pending before courts across India.

7. The Committee expresses its concern at the continuing conflict between widespread reports from many sources of the continued existence of bonded labour in the country, and the position of the state governments which are responsible for this subject to the effect that the phenomenon no longer exists. At the same time the Government itself, as well as other sources, continues to indicate that bonded labourers are being identified and released in practice. Several such instances were noted in some detail in the Committee's previous comments. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take strong and effective measures to identify and release bonded labourers in the country and to gather statistics which will allow a reliable picture of the problem and the monitoring of the effectiveness of measures to correct it.

Responsible bodies

8. As indicated, there is a division of responsibilities for dealing with this question. The Committee has previously referred to the proposal to set up a national commission on bonded labour to implement the 1976 Act, and to the decision that it was unnecessary to do this in view of the establishment in 1993 of the National Human Rights Commission. The Government has again reported that the meeting of state labour secretaries referred to above is still of this opinion. The Government has also indicated that there is no need to establish a network of agencies to supervise and coordinate the abolition of bonded labour, as had been recommended by the National Commission on Rural Labour in 1991. The Committee notes these indications, and reiterates its regret that there is now no regular overview of the situation published by any government agency, as was previously the case until the abolition of the post of Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes, and its replacement by a Commission of the same title which apparently has as yet published no reports.

9. Noting that the Government considers that the National Human Rights Commission should deal with this problem at the national level, the Committee requests the Government to indicate what powers this Commission has in this regard, and whether it has received and dealt with complaints on bonded labour, or carried out other activities in this connection. Please also indicate what action has been taken by the Commission to implement the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.

10. In previous comments the Committee has asked for information on the functioning of vigilance committees which the 1976 Act requires to be established to deal with this problem, and in its previous report the Government supplied information on the institution of such committees in several states. The Committee noted that, in a report published in 1991, the National Commission on Rural Labour stated that while a few vigilance committees were doing good work, most had not been established or had not been active. The Government states again in its report that, according to reports submitted by state governments, these committees are in place and are functioning well. In the above-mentioned comments received from the Mahabugnagar District Palamoori Contract Labour Union, it is however indicated that these vigilance committees do not exist in most places. In view of the contradictory information received, the Committee hopes the Government will clarify this issue in its next report, on the basis of information received both from the state governments and from other sources.

11. As concerns the involvement of trade unions in ending bonded labour, the Committee recalls that the Government has indicated that, because bonded labour usually takes place in the informal and unorganized sectors, the involvement of trade unions was not feasible. The Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee have referred in this connection to the existence of bonded labourers in several sectors such as stone quarries, brick kilns, building and road construction, forestry, bidi workers, carpet weavers, etc. The Government indicates in its report that workers in these sectors do have the right to organize, and the Committee notes with interest that a Central Board of Workers' Education has been set up. This Board conducts awareness sessions and training programmes for workers in the small-scale and unorganized sector, to inform them of their rights, and that such programmes have taken place in 1995-96 in several of the sectors mentioned above. The Government notes that these are not programmes with a wide reach. Nevertheless, the Committee hopes the Government will be able to encourage such training in the future, and that it will find ways to work with both trade unions and employers' organizations to identify and eliminate bonded labour wherever it may occur.

12. There has also been discussion previously of the need to involve voluntary agencies in the fight against bonded labour. The Government indicates in its report that the centrally sponsored scheme for providing financial assistance to these organizations has now been transferred to the states, but gives no indication of how it is functioning under state management. Please provide detailed information in this regard in the next report.

Rehabilitation

13. The Committee has previously noted the considerable time lag between liberation from bonded labour and rehabilitation, and reports of poor follow-up leading to a relapse into bondage. The figures provided by the Government in its most recent report indicate an improvement, with about 7,500 bonded labourers awaiting rehabilitation in May 1995 as compared to more than 10,000 at the time of the previous report. This figure of 10,000 was taken as the target for 1995-96, but the Government has reported that by March 1996 only 1,115 had been rehabilitated. It was expecting at the time of the report to meet with state governments on this shortly, and the Committee requests the Government to provide more detailed information on the problems encountered, the reasons for slow processing and the present situation, taking into account also any newly identified bonded labourers.

14. The Committee notes the information in reply to its previous request concerning bonded labourers designated "not available for rehabilitation", who are said to have died or migrated after release. This may be another indication of the slow pace of rehabilitation.

15. The Committee previously noted that under the centrally sponsored scheme for rehabilitation a sum of 6,250 rupees was to be spent for the rehabilitation of each bonded labourer, and questioned whether this sum was adequate to the needs of rehabilitation. It welcomes the statement in the report that this sum has now been increased to 10,000 rupees.

16. The Committee had previously noted with interest the details supplied by the Government on the measures taken in nine states for the integration of the centrally sponsored scheme for rehabilitation with other programmes, and asked the Government to provide further information in this regard. It notes that the Government has reported several kinds of measures available to rehabilitate bonded labourers, including allotment of houses and land, providing employment under the Employment Assurance Scheme, social security coverage in several respects, admission to schools, the organization of cooperative ventures and a credit scheme. The Committee notes the statement that land-based schemes have proven successful in rehabilitation, and that given the pressure on land and the need to decrease delays, state governments have been given the right to disburse assistance under the centrally sponsored scheme. The Committee notes that it is difficult to form a general impression of how well these different rehabilitation schemes work in practice, and requests the Government to provide such an assessment in its next report.

Enforcement

17. In its previous comments, the Committee analysed in detail the number of prosecutions, convictions and acquittals in different states under the Bonded Labour (Liberation) Act, 1976. It also questioned the adequacy of the penalties imposed (the fines are only 2,000 rupees under the 1976 legislation), and asked for updated information on both these questions. The Government has indicated that no additional prosecutions have been brought because of the absence of any fresh identification of bonded labour. It also indicates that the penal provisions under the Act are quite stringent, but does not comment on the amount of the fine provided for in the legislation. The Committee can only take note of this information, and requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether any further actions have been brought and how they are disposed of, in view in particular of the Supreme Court action referred to above. The Committee also requests current information on the penalties for infringement of the Act.

Children in bondage and other forms of compulsory labour

18. The Committee notes that observations were received from the World Confederation of Labour on the question of bonded child labour, in a communication dated 23 October 1997 which was dispatched to the Government for any comments it might wish to make. As there has not been time for the Government to reply, consideration of this information and of any comments the Government may make on it will be dealt with the next time the Committee examines this file.

19. The Committee notes the information supplied in the Government's report and in the Conference Committee on bonded child labour and other forms of compulsory child labour, which is to be distinguished in the context of the present Convention from the existence of a large number of working children who are not under compulsion in the sense of the Convention. It notes that the Government is receiving assistance from the ILO's International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) and other donors.

20. The Committee notes that -- as for bonded labour in general -- there is no generally agreed order of magnitude for the number of children in bondage or in other forms of compulsory labour in India, though some estimates are in the millions. The Committee is considering two situations under this Convention: children who are actually in a situation of debt bondage; and those who are under other forms of compulsion to perform work, particularly the most hazardous forms of work which are performed under situations of constraint. It is not always clear from the information received whether the situations described comprise bonded or other forced child labour, which makes numerical estimates more difficult; but it does not appear to be in doubt that compulsory child labour exists on a large scale in the country.

21. The Committee notes the additional information supplied to the Conference Committee on the implementation of the blueprint for action entitled "Identification, release and rehabilitation of child labour", covering a range of actions to attack the child labour problem especially in hazardous occupations. Noting that no information has been provided on the impact of these activities, the Committee requests the Government to include in its next report an assessment of the activities, the impact they have had in practice, and plans for future action.

22. The Committee has been informed that the Supreme Court of India adopted a decision on 10 December 1996 in the case of M.C. Mehta v. the State of Tamil Nadu, after the Government's report was received. In that decision, the Supreme Court ordered a number of actions relevant to this Convention, including the following:

-- simultaneous action in all districts of the country to withdraw children working in hazardous industries and ensure their education in appropriate institutions;

-- a survey to identify the children in hazardous industries and a contribution of Rs.20,000 per child to be paid by the offending employers of children in hazardous industries to a welfare fund to be established for the education of children;

-- employment to be provided to one adult member of the family of the child that had been withdrawn from work, or alternatively a contribution of Rs.5,000 to be made to the new welfare fund to be established by the state government;

-- financial assistance for families of the children withdrawn from work to be paid from the interest earnings on the corpus of Rs.20,000-25,000 deposited in the welfare fund as long as the child in question is attending school.

23. Please provide information in the next report on how this decision is being implemented, as concerns the present Convention, and a copy of the decision.

24. As concerns protection against sexual exploitation, the Committee noted previously that all state governments and union territory administrations had been advised to form advisory committees for the eradication of child prostitution and to devise and implement social welfare programmes for their care, protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation. Please indicate whether these advisory committees have been formed, and what form their work has taken so far. The Committee would be grateful to receive any reports that any of them may so far have issued describing their work.

25. The Committee also noted that the state government of Uttar Pradesh was to conduct a survey of the problem of alleged child prostitution. The Committee notes from the report that the survey has been entrusted by the state government to the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, and that it will examine the magnitude of the problem, characteristics of the victims, and existing facilities for rehabilitation of child prostitutes, inter alia. The survey was to be completed within a year, and the results communicated to the ILO. The Committee looks forward to receiving this report, and any other available information on the magnitude of the problem in the country and on actions which have been taken or are contemplated to deal with it.

26. The Committee notes that this problem appears to extend beyond children, and again refers to the 1997 conclusions of the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations, which indicated:

31. The Committee deplores the high incidence of child prostitution and trafficking of women and girls into forced prostitution, and it regrets the lack of effective measures to prevent such practices and to protect and rehabilitate the victims. The Committee also regrets that women who have been forced into prostitution are criminalized by the Immoral Trafficking Prevention Act and, further, that article 20 of the Act puts the burden of proof on a woman to prove that she is not a prostitute, which is incompatible with the presumption of innocence. Therefore the Committee recommends that the application of this law to women in the situation described be repealed and that measures be taken to protect and rehabilitate women and children whose rights have been violated in this way.

27. The Committee endorses the conclusion by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, which refers to forced prostitution incompatible with the present Convention, and requests the Government to take measures to repeal the legislation and inform the Committee of the measures taken or envisaged to ensure conformity with the Convention.

28. The Committee considers that comments of employers' and workers' organizations on the application of the Convention would be useful to examine the issues raised in the present observation. The Committee would therefore be grateful if the Government would endeavour to obtain such comments and communicate them with its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

1. The Committee has taken note of an observation on the application of the Convention in India made by the National Labour Federation of Pakistan in a communication dated 15 February 1995, a copy of which was transmitted to the Government on 24 February 1995. In its communication the Federation alleges that the Indian army imposes forced labour on civilians in Kashmir, in particular for porterage service. The Committee hopes that the Government will forward its observations on the allegations.

2. The Committee in its previous comments pointed out that the 1985 amendment to the Nagaland (Requisition of Porters) Act, 1965, did not modify the definition of "emergency" in section 2(a) of the Act which includes situations under which "movement of commodities, stores and equipment deemed essential to the life of the community or to the maintenance of the law and order or prevention of any threat to peace, to a place not connected by road or rail is impeded for want of porters", or "movement of the police force, Assam Rifles or units of the regular armed forces to a place not connected by road or rail to deal with a breach of the peace, or any threat to law or order, is impeded for want of porters to carry any essential items of equipment and baggage". The Committee requested the Government to take further action to limit resort to the requisition of porters to cases where it is necessary to deal with a calamity or threatened calamity endangering the existence or well-being of the whole or part of the population. The Committee notes the Government's renewed statement in its report that the Committee's comments have been brought to the notice of the state government of Nagaland. It once more expresses the hope that the Government will soon be in a position to indicate that the necessary action has been taken to amend the legislation so as to ensure the observance of the Convention.

3. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government regarding the number of air force and naval personnel who left service on their own initiative, including statistical data on cases where applications for release were not accepted.

The Committee notes from the Government's report that the guidelines governing premature retirement/resignation of defence service officers provide that requests for premature retirement/resignation from defence service officers will be considered on individual merits. The grounds on which applications should normally be recommended are supersession to substantive rank, extreme compassionate grounds, low medical category, better employment in civil life and failure to acquire technical qualifications. The applications of officers trained in specialized courses at government expense are not considered before expiry of the minimum period, as indicated below:

(i) courses abroad up to six months' duration: three years;

(ii) courses abroad of over six months' duration: five years;

(iii) study leave in India and abroad: five years;

(iv) courses in India of over six months' duration: five years.

Airmen are permitted to obtain their discharge from service on compassionate grounds; for applying for Group A posts/services in the central/state government and undertakings; on educational grounds and for civil employment in the last year of service.

The Government points out that the Indian armed forces are raised on a purely voluntary basis. After joining the India defence forces the persons serve for a specified period.

The Committee takes due note of these indications. In the absence of the texts of the Defence Service Regulations and the Regulations for the Navy, the Committee requests the Government to specify the periods for which officers and lower ranks are being engaged. Referring to the explanations provided for in paragraphs 33, 68 and 72-73 of its 1979 General Survey on the Abolition of Forced Labour, the Committee requests the Government to indicate also any measures taken or envisaged to allow members of the armed forces in time of peace to leave the forces on their own initiative, without consideration of individual merits, provided that they have served a specified minimum period and give notice of reasonable length.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

1. Further to the discussion that took place on the problem of bonded labour in India at the Conference Committee in 1994, the Committee has taken note of the detailed reports supplied by the Government in June 1994 and February 1995 on the application of the Convention.

2. In previous comments the Committee noted that over the years since the authorities of India took the decision to abolish the bonded labour system in 1976 and the Supreme Court adopted its landmark decision in 1983, the situation in practice did not appear to have improved very much, and a number of proposals and recommendations made by the National Commission on Rural Labour in 1991 with a view to improving the situation had not so far been implemented.

3. The Committee noted the statement made by a Government representative to the Conference Committee in 1993 that a high level of awareness already existed in India about the problem of bonded labour and the Government was making every possible effort to eradicate it. In 1994, the Conference Committee noted that, notwithstanding the efforts made, much remained to be done to overcome the problems already discussed in the course of many earlier sessions concerning, in particular, the identification, liberation and rehabilitation of persons in bonded labour, including children, as well as in particular the introduction of an efficient enforcement system. In this regard, the Conference Committee remained very deeply concerned by the situation.

Identification of bonded labourers and magnitude of the problem

4. Diverging estimates. The Committee previously noted that there exists no comprehensive survey of the magnitude of the problem. One survey conducted in 1978-79 under the joint auspices of the Gandhi Peace Foundation (GPF) and the National Labour Institute (NLI) covering 10 out of 21 states, but only the traditional areas, estimated the number of bonded labourers at 2.6 million; a report by the Subcommission on Bonded Labour set up by the Central Standing Committee on Rural Unorganized Labour referred in 1979 to some 2 million bonded labourers in the rural sector. In 1980, nine state governments gave an estimate of about 0.12 million bonded labourers, while in 1990 this number rose to 0.24 million in 12 states. The Bonded Liberation Front of India has put forward the figure of some 5 million adult and 10 million child bonded labourers.

5. 1992 government instructions. In its statement to the Conference Committee in 1992, the Government referred to difficulties in the collection of information from various state governments. Noting that the identification of bonded labourers was mainly undertaken by the Revenue Departments and the Block Development Officers of the state governments, it indicated that according to statistics available as of 31 March 1991, the total number of identified bonded labourers was 255,608, out of which 222,985 had been rehabilitated. In order to accelerate the process of identification, the central Government had issued circular instructions to the various state governments highlighting the need for undertaking from time to time fresh efforts for identification. It suggested the following steps:

(a) household surveys should be conducted by the Revenue Department with the help of field agencies like the Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Zonal Directorate of Backward Classes' Welfare and similar agencies on the lines of the survey drawn up by the National Sample Survey Organization in their 32nd round;

(b) identification should be done during censuses conducted for the allotment of house sites under the IRDP;

(c) intensive studies should be undertaken in stone quarries and brick kilns.

In view of this, the chief secretaries of all concerned state governments had been addressed by the Union Labour Secretary in the matter of taking vigorous steps for the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers on 7 February 1992, and a system of quarterly monitoring had been introduced.

6. In 1993, the Committee, while noting that in its report for the period ending 30 June 1985, the Government already referred to the same kind of measures, expressed the hope that the Government would provide detailed information on the results achieved following these instructions, in particular on any noticeable increase in the number of bonded labourers identified and rehabilitated; on measures taken at state level and reported to the central Government; and on any new assessment of the situation made by the central Government.

7. Definition to be used. The Committee observed, however, that the report by the Commission on Rural Labour indicated that the definition of bonded labour adopted by the National Sample Survey Organization (32nd round, 1977-78) was restrictive, not encompassing fully the definition of the Act, though covering traditional and non-traditional areas. The Committee expressed the hope that any household survey conducted, as well as the censuses and studies to be made, would take into consideration the full definition of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of India in 1983 and with the amendments adopted in 1985. It requested the Government to provide information in this regard, including any instructions issued to this effect.

8. Absence of follow-up to 1992 government instructions. The Committee notes from the Government's statement to the Conference Committee in 1993 that work to be undertaken by the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) on the proposition of the Ministry of Labour to gather information on bonded labour is not scheduled before 1998-99. With its report received in June 1994, the Government has supplied a statement on the number of bonded labourers identified, released and rehabilitated in 12 states as at 31 March 1993, and the tentative rehabilitation targets fixed for 1993-94. The total numbers were given as 251,069 identified and released and 224,074 rehabilitated, i.e. for some reason 1 per cent less identified than two years before and 1 per cent more rehabilitated (with a tentative target for rehabilitation during 1993-94 of 2,179 labourers in seven states). No information was given on methodology or definition used, nor on any follow-up of the above-mentioned instructions issued by the central Government in February 1992.

9. Further preliminary discussions. In the same report, the Government indicated that on 15 April 1993, in a meeting held by the Minister of State for Labour with the Labour Secretaries of the states in which the problem of bonded labour is endemic, it was decided to constitute a Committee comprising labour secretaries of five states to study and recommend a workable definition of bonded labour and the modalities and procedure for their identification. At this meeting, it was agreed that all the state governments will conduct a fresh survey for the purpose of identifying bonded labour in their respective states. While conducting the survey, the recommendations of the above Committee appointed to evolve a workable definition of bonded labour will be borne in mind. It was also agreed that all the states should endeavour to complete the survey by September 1993. Two meetings of the Committee of Labour Secretaries have been held on 18 June and 23 July 1993, where the methodology for identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers in different states and the difficulties faced by them were discussed. The Committee was unanimous on the adoption of a simple workable definition of bonded labour. The Committee's term has been extended, and the Government has indicated in its report received in February 1995 that the Committee's report has been received by the Government of India and is under consultation with the state governments. It was not supplied to the ILO. The Government adds that during September-October 1994, the Labour Minister held three separate conferences with 15 state labour ministers, which have recommended that states will undertake surveys to identify bonded labourers as may be in existence despite the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. These surveys were to be completed within a period of six months. The states were also selectively to undertake follow-up studies to assess if any of the rehabilitated bonded labourers had since relapsed into bondage.

10. The Government further indicates that some Members of Parliament have pointed to the incidence of bonded labour in Dehradun region of the state of Uttar Pradesh. The state government of Uttar Pradesh has denied any fresh incidence of the problem. To ascertain the existence of bonded labour, if any, in the Dehradun area, the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration Mussoorie has agreed to conduct a survey.

11. Continued absence of progress. The Committee has taken due note of these indications. It notes that none of the state-wide surveys repeatedly announced by the Government, with deadlines past, appear so far to have been undertaken by the state governments, and that the state labour ministers apparently decided not to use the definition of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, as interpreted by the Supreme Court of India in 1983 and with the amendments adopted in 1985, but a "simple workable" one, which has not been communicated to the ILO.

12. Occupations to be surveyed. In its 1994 observation, the Committee also noted from the report by the National Commission on Rural Labour that in the following non-agricultural occupations bonded labour elements have been noticed but have not been adequately covered by surveys and studies: stone quarries, migrant labourers, brick kilns, Joginis and Devadasis, fishermen, building and road construction labour, forest labour, bidi workers, carpet weavers, potters, weavers, head loaders, child labour in match and fireworks industries, etc. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on any studies or surveys made in these activities and on the number of bonded labourers identified, released and rehabilitated.

13. Case-studies. Haryana quarries: the Government's views. The Government has supplied in February 1995 a copy of the report dated 30 March 1993 of the Subcommittee on Elimination of Child Labour in the Match and Fireworks Industries in Tamil Nadu, and in June 1994, a copy of the report of the Committee appointed by the Supreme Court by its Order dated 21 February 1991 to investigate the issue of identifying bonded labourers in the State of Haryana (the Supreme Court had disposed of the main matter, i.e. the Writ Petition No. 2135/1982 Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. the Union of India, by its judgement dated 16 December 1983). In commenting on the report of that Committee, the Government, in its report received in June 1994, refers to the Committee's assessment of 2,000 workers employed in the stone quarries of Faridabad district, and alleges that while the Committee made critical references to the unsatisfactory working conditions in the quarries and disputes concerning minimum wages paid to the workers, it has not considered these workers as bonded labourers; in its latest report the Government adds that "the outcome of this case, involving one of the most active NGOs in the field of bonded labour, reveals that, though well-intentioned, their claims/complaints can be highly exaggerated".

14. Haryana quarries: irrelevance of government figures. These contentions are not borne out by the conclusions made by the Committee appointed by the Supreme Court. That Committee noted that while a report submitted by the Government of Haryana stated that the number of bonded labourers was 544, of which the number rehabilitated was 21 as on 30 November 1990, these figures related to the bonded labourers identified all over Haryana and mostly covering brick kilns, while the petitioner was referring to the issue of only the workers of the stone quarry of the district Faridabad; for that alone, the number of persons in the original list supplied by the petitioner was 2,800, out of which 1,983 were then identified; the final list of 2,000 persons, prepared by the Committee, includes some persons who were not on the original list. In addition, it is the estimate of the Committee that some 200 persons have been left out of the final list who were not available for identification, either out of fear of the contractor or because they had gone out the day of the Committee's visit.

15. Criteria for identification. The Committee appointed by the Supreme Court adopted the following criteria for identification:

Article 23 of the Constitution of India which prohibits trafficking in human beings and forced labour.

The definitions of "Bonded Labour System" in section 2(g) of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, the definitions of bonded debt in section 2(d), "Bonded Labour" in section 2(e), "Bonded Labourers" in section 2(f), "Nominal Wages" in section 2(i) and other principles laid down in the said Act.

The various principles laid down by the Supreme Court on the Concept of forced labour under Article 23, and its relationship with wage in the People's Union for Democratic Rights v. the Union of India, 1982 (8) SCC 235 and Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. the Union of India 1984 (3) SCC 161 (thereinafter referred to as the PUDR judgement and the Bonded Labour judgement respectively).

A legal note was prepared to aid the Committee in summarizing all the principles above and the conclusions which emerged from the same were:

(a) any form of forced labour which includes bonded labour is prohibited under article 23 of the Constitution and any contravention of the provision, which is enforceable against the State and any individual, is an offence (PUDR judgement);

(b) the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, has been enacted with a view to giving effect to article 23 (Bonded Labour judgement);

(c) every form of forced labour is within the inhibition of article 23 and it makes no difference whether the person who is forced to give his labour to another is remunerated or not (PUDR judgement);

(d) "force" is mere legal or physical force but includes force arising from compulsion or economic circumstances which leaves no choice or alternative to a person and compels him to work for less than the minimum wage (PUDR judgement);

(e) where a person provides labour or services for less than the minimum wage, the labour or service provided by him is clearly within the scope and ambit of "forced labour" under article 23 (PUDR judgement);

(f) whenever it is shown that a labourer is made to provide forced labour, the presumption would be that he is required to do so for economic consideration received by him and he is therefore a bonded labourer (Bonded Labour judgement).

16. Haryana quarries: role of wage structure. The Committee appointed by the Supreme Court has applied all the aforesaid criteria for identification of persons in the petitioners list as well as for fresh cases or cases left out earlier. In its conclusions, the Committee noted that the Supreme Court has held in the PUDR judgement, inter alia, that where a person provides labour or services for less than the minimum wage, the labour or service provided by him is clearly within the scope of "forced labour" under article 23 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has held in the Bonded Labour judgement that whenever it is shown that a labourer is made to provide forced labour, the presumption would be that he is required to do so for economic consideration received by him and he is therefore a bonded labourer. The Supreme Court, in its Bonded Labour judgement, has also directed as part of the now well-known 21 directives, inter alia, that all necessary steps be taken to ensure the payment of the stipulated wages to the workers (directives 5, 6 and 8). The Committee has, therefore, laid some emphasis on the wage structure which was clearly identifiable for the purpose of including the workers for the benefits available to them under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. Other criteria like indebtedness or being able to change contractors were varying criteria and were not necessarily constant.

17. Action called for. The Committee hopes that the necessary measures will soon be taken at the national and state levels for the systematic identification of bonded labourers under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, now stalled in practice for several years, and that the Government will supply information on action taken pursuant to its instructions of 1992 and on concrete results, bearing in mind also the indications by the National Commission on Rural Labour on occupations that have not been adequately covered by surveys or studies.

Role of vigilance committees

18. In previous comments, the Committee asked for information on the functioning of vigilance committees and on the effective implementation of the competences entrusted to them by the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act 1976, for the identification, liberation and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. The Government has forwarded specific information made available by ten state Governments on the numbers of vigilance committees constituted in districts and subdivisions, with some indications on their composition and activities. In its report received in June 1994, the Government indicated that the central Government does not directly monitor the functioning of the vigilance committees at present, and that the central Government has not received any proposal from the state Governments to improve the functioning of the vigilance committees. In February 1995, the Government added that the vigilance committees have been constituted in all the states where the problem of bonded labour is considered to be endemic, and the Government considers that over the years, the achievements of the vigilance committees in undertaking identification and rehabilitation of a very large number of bonded labourers who are very widely dispersed in rural and interior areas, are proof of their effective functioning.

19. The Committee considers that this appreciation is not borne out by the statistics supplied by the Government for the last years, mentioned in point 8 above. In its report published in 1991, the National Commission on Rural Labour indicated that, while a few vigilance committees had been doing good work, most of them had not been constituted or reconstituted or had not been active as meetings were not held regularly. There had been no monitoring of the functioning of these committees and in the last few years fresh identification of bonded labourers had almost stopped. The Committee notes that this is still so, although vigilance committees at present exist at the district and subdivision levels in a number of states. As indicated by the National Commission, it appears necessary to activate the vigilance committees with the composition as prescribed. In addition, the involvement of voluntary agencies and the setting up of a national authority on bonded labour, as recommended by the National Commission on Rural Labour in 1991 may help in making vigilance committees accountable and accelerating the process of identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers.

Involvement of voluntary agencies

20. In previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the operation of the scheme for the involvement of voluntary agencies in the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. In its reports received in June 1994 and February 1995, the Government has provided the names of ten voluntary agencies operating, mostly at the level of one or two districts, in six states, and information received from eight of the state governments regarding the activities of voluntary agencies. In Bihar, Antyodaya Ashram of Santhal Pargana and T. Chakkalakar of Rampura Ashram have helped to identify 2,662 bonded labourers in Dumka district and 317 in Bettiah district respectively. In Tamil Nadu, the Organization for Rehabilitation and Development of Bonded Labourers, Madras, has conducted a survey on the rehabilitation of Tamil-speaking released bonded labourers and has submitted its report and suggestions for improvement to the Union Minister in 1990. In Uttar Pradesh, Bandhua Mukti Morcha and Bandhua Mukti are working in Mirzapur district; in none of the other districts magistrates have submitted positive replies to the state government's request for contacting the voluntary agencies. The state government of Andhra Pradesh has agreed to undertake fresh efforts to associate voluntary agencies in the task of identification of bonded labour, "even though in the past the response was not encouraging". The state government of Maharashtra has been categorical in its view against involvement of voluntary agencies "because they tend to take an exaggerated view of the existence of bonded labour"; the Committee notes that in Maharashtra 1,382 bonded labourers have been identified and 1,300 rehabilitated, while 82 are reported as not requiring rehabilitation assistance. By contrast, the state government of Karnataka has issued guidelines to the deputy commissioners for identification of bonded labourers wherein it is emphasized that the non-governmental organizations and the voluntary agencies should be involved in this task. Although the details of the results achieved in this exercise have not been mentioned, it has been pointed out that they are doing remarkable work. Karnataka happens to be the state where, on 31 March 1993, the greatest number of bonded labourers had been identified and released (62,708 persons) and rehabilitated (54,078 persons).

21. The Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will take action to stimulate the involvement of more voluntary agencies, in particular those which have been concerned with bonded labour for years, such as the Bonded Labour Liberation Front, AWARE and Vidhayak Samsad, and that it will provide detailed information on the measures taken and the results achieved.

Involvement of trade unions

22. In previous comments, the Committee stressed the importance of the involvement of trade unions in the process of identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. In its report received in June 1994, the Government states that trade unions are in the organized sector and their involvement in identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, who are mainly found in the unorganized sector, may not be a workable proposition. The Committee takes due note of this. Recalling the indication by the National Commission on Rural Labour that bonded labour elements have been noticed but not adequately covered, inter alia, in non-agricultural occupations such as stone quarries, brick kilns, building and road construction, forestry, bidi workers, carpet weavers, potters, weavers, the Committee hopes that measures will be taken, where necessary, for ensuring respect for the right of workers in these occupations to organize.

Proposal for the institution of a national authority on bonded labour

23. The committee previously noted that during the discussion in the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery during its 15th Session, July 1990, Anti-Slavery International stated that the continued gravity and magnitude of the bonded labour system was partly the result of a central weakness in the design and functioning of the machinery for the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, and called for the establishment of a national commission on bonded labour. The Committee further noted that in its report published in 1991 the National Commission on Rural Labour recommended that the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, should be improved by the creation of a network of agencies at the national and state levels as nodal agencies to supervise and coordinate the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, and to make administration more responsive and vigilance committees accountable. A national authority or national commission on bonded labour should be constituted on the lines of the National Commission on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and at state levels there should be commissioners for bonded labour.

24. In reply, the Government indicated to the Conference Committee in 1992 that the question of setting up a national commission on bonded labour was examined in detail by the Ministry of Labour in the light of the recommendations of the National Commission on Rural Labour, and that it was decided that the setting up of such a commission was not necessary at this stage. What was required was better implementation of the provisions of the Act by the state governments which should be closely monitored each month.

25. In 1993, the Committee noted that a Bill to establish a commission on human rights was being submitted to Parliament, and considered that this commission might be entrusted with questions concerning bonded labour. Following the setting up of a National Human Rights Commission in October 1993 under the Protection of the Human Rights Act, 1993, the Committee in 1994 requested the Government to provide information on any measures envisaged to extend the competences of the Commission accordingly or to establish a national commission on bonded labour.

26. The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report received in February 1995 that the National Human Rights Commission is expected to perform a wide array of functions and its scope of activity is not limited to violations committed by agents of the State alone. The Government is still of the opinion that better implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, by the state governments will eradicate the evil practice. However, various interest groups have pleaded for the setting up of a national commission on bonded labour. Accordingly, a committee of labour ministers, chaired by the Labour Minister, government of Maharashtra, was constituted to examine this issue. There has been a delay in the submission of the report of this committee on account of frequent changes in the incumbency of the Labour Minister of Maharashtra. The Maharashtra state government has been requested to expedite the committee's report.

27. The Committee takes due note of these indications. It observes that four years have elapsed since the National Commission on Rural Labour published its report. Since then, the recommendation for the setting up of a network of agencies to supervise and coordinate the abolition of bonded labour at the national and state levels has not been implemented, and with a few exceptions, mainly due to the initiative of voluntary agencies, the identification of bonded labourers appears to have come to a halt. At the same time, the Committee notes that there is no longer a regular presentation of a general overview of the state of the problem as had been given up to 1989, to a certain extent, in the reports of the Commissioner on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (29th report, 1987-89) and lastly in the report of the National Commission on Rural Labour, published in 1991. The Committee observes that if a high level of awareness already exists about the problem of bonded labour, it is not apparent that every possible effort is being made to maintain this awareness, let alone to solve the problem. The Committee looks forward to learning of action taken on the proposal made by the National Commission on Rural labour in 1991 for the institution of a national authority on bonded labour to supervise and coordinate at the national and state levels the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers and to make administration more responsive and vigilance committees accountable.

Rehabilitation

28. Time-lag between liberation and rehabilitation. The Committee previously noted that the National Commission on Rural Labour pointed to the considerable time-lag between liberation and rehabilitation and poor follow-up on rehabilitation, leading to misery and relapse into bondage. Referring to the statistics provided by the Government concerning the numbers of bonded labourers identified and those rehabilitated and the targets for 1993-94, the Committee noted that in certain states large numbers of identified bonded labourers still are to be rehabilitated. Thus, on 31 March 1993, in the state of Andhra Pradesh, out of 35,934 bonded labourers identified, 25,753 had been rehabilitated and 10,181 still remained to be rehabilitated but regrettably the tentative target for rehabilitation during 1993-94 was only 1,000.

29. The Committee notes with interest from the Government's latest report that the rehabilitation of bonded labour which was tending to lag behind in Andhra Pradesh has been speeded up as a result of concerted efforts by the Ministry of Labour and the state government and problems being encountered at the field level have been sorted out. The flow of financial assistance from the Government of India to the state government of Andhra Pradesh for rehabilitation of bonded labour has increased from nil rupees in 1991-92 to 2.7 million rupees in 1992-93 and further to 10.1 million rupees in 1993-94. The annual target of rehabilitating 1,000 bonded labourers in Andhra Pradesh in 1993-94 was practically achieved. As compared to the previous year, the target for 1994-95 for rehabilitation of bonded labour in Andhra Pradesh has been enhanced by 100 per cent. The Committee welcomes this progress but notes that even at the rate of 2,000 rehabilitated persons per year, the last bonded labourers available for rehabilitation as on 31 March 1993 would be rehabilitated only in 1999. The Committee looks forward to learning of further measures taken to accelerate the process of rehabilitation of the identified bonded labourers, in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka as well as in other states, where bonded labourers are newly identified.

30. Noting that, for certain states, considerable numbers of bonded labourers have been designated in the Government's report as "not available for rehabilitation", the Committee would appreciate it if the Government would supply an explanation by reference to the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976.

31. Adaptation of the centrally sponsored scheme. The Committee previously noted that under the centrally sponsored scheme for rehabilitation of bonded labour a sum of 6,250 rupees is to be spent for the rehabilitation of each bonded labourer. Out of this sum 500 rupees are meant to be given in cash to the bonded labourer soon after his release to enable him to tide over the period till his rehabilitation. The Committee asked whether such a sum had proved sufficient to avoid the newly freed bonded labourer falling back into bondage on account of the lack of means of subsistence, given in particular the fact that a long period of time elapses between his release and rehabilitation.

32. The Committee notes from the Government's report received in June 1994 that state governments have taken diverging views: Haryana considered that since no bonded labour had been identified to be released, no occasion had arisen for making the payment of 500 rupees. Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu stated that there had been no complaints about inadequacy of funds or relapse into bondage; by contrast Gujarat, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka and Bihar considered the subsistence allowance of 500 rupees not to be adequate; for Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh it should now be enhanced to 1,000 rupees, and in Bihar, the Government has suggested that it should be 1,500 rupees, paid at the rate of 250 rupees per month for six months, the duration that the rehabilitation process commonly takes. According to the government of Uttar Pradesh, the overall amount of 6,250 rupees should be enhanced to 15,000 rupees. The government of Karnataka added that rehabilitation of bonded labourers is undertaken by promoting their self-employment. During 1992-93 the government of Karnataka started providing agricultural land for rehabilitating bonded labourers in groups. The minimum size of agricultural estates is 50 acres for 12 rehabilitated bonded labourers. This exercise has been initiated in six districts; it permits to provide common facilities, to have convergence of government programmes within the cluster and to properly monitor the work done.

33. The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to increase the funds payable under the centrally sponsored scheme and that it will supply further information on the action taken in this regard.

34. Integration of the centrally sponsored rehabilitation scheme with other anti-poverty programmes. The Committee has noted with interest the details supplied by the Government on the measures taken in nine states for the integration of the centrally sponsored scheme with other programmes, such as Integrated Rural Development Programme, Jawahar Rozgar Vojana, Employment Assurance Scheme, Training of Rural Youth for Self-Employment, Special Component Plan/Sub-Plan for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. It hopes that the Government will be in a position to report on further action in this field.

35. Follow-up of other recommendations. The Committee previously noted that in its statement to the Conference in 1993 the government representative referred to land based, non land based and skill craft based rehabilitation grants. It also noted that the National Commission on Rural Labour pointed to shortcomings, such as poor quality of land in the land based scheme, and stressed the need to attempt rehabilitation for migrant bonded labourers either in the state in which they work or in their state of origin. The National Commission proposed that the scheme of rehabilitation be chosen in consultation with the beneficiary and be well planned; lands be of reasonably good quality in the case of land based schemes; the jurisdiction banks be directed to provide consumption loans, since the predominant cause for lapsing into bondage is indebtedness largely for consumption needs. The Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will provide information on measures taken or envisaged following the proposals by the National Commission on Rural Labour.

36. Noting with interest the information supplied by the Government on the "Alternate Scheme of Self-Development of the Released Bonded Labourers" submitted by the Mukti Niketan in the Supreme Court of India on being invited to do so in public interest litigation (Writ Petition No. 483 of 1987), the Committee hopes that a copy of the judgement will soon be forwarded. It also looks forward to learning of the outcome of Supreme Court Writ Petition No. 121215 of 1984.

Penal sanctions and enforcement

37. The Committee noted in its previous comments from the report of the National Commission on Rural Labour that there had been very few prosecutions against persons keeping labour in bondage. The National Commission stressed that the process of identification and release and bringing of criminal proceedings should, as far as possible, be simultaneous activities, and made a certain number of proposals to improve the situation. The Committee noted the Government's statement to the Conference Committee in 1993 that criminal prosecution had to be based on due process of law and could not be done within artificial time-limits. The Committee asked how much time was required by due process of law under national conditions in order to file a criminal prosecution. Noting that the Act abolishing the bonded labour system was adopted in 1976 and referring to the National Commission on Rural Labour's assessment, the Committee asked for detailed information on the measures taken to ensure due process of law. Noting also that the penal sanctions provided by the Act of 1976 include, besides prison of up to three years, a rather meaningless fine up to 2,000 rupees, the Committee asked for information on measures taken to ensure the effective punishment of offenders indicating, in particular, the number of proceedings and of convictions as well as penalties imposed since the Act of 1976 was brought into force.

38. Adequacy of penalties. The Committee notes that no information has been supplied by the Government on the penalties imposed under the Act of 1976. Recalling that under Article 25 of the Convention, the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and the Government must ensure that penalties imposed are really adequate and strictly enforced, the Committee again expresses the hope that the necessary action will be taken to ensure that the penalties imposed by law are really adequate, and that the Government will provide information on any corresponding amendment of the 1976 Act. Pending such action, the Committee hopes that full details will be supplied in the number of cases in which mere fines, actual prison sentences or suspended ones were imposed on those convicted.

39. Enforcement statistics. The Committee notes the statistics supplied by the Government on the number of prosecutions launched in 12 states under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, up to March 1993, with an indication of the number of offenders prosecuted (in three states) and convicted (in Uttar Pradesh). The Committee notes that in Uttar Pradesh alone, with 27,489 bonded labourers identified as on 31 March 1993, 2,305 prosecutions were launched, resulting in 1,031 acquittals, 84 cases pending and 1,190 convictions; by contrast, for 11 other states, with over 220,000 bonded labourers identified, the Government's statement shows a total of only 2,354 prosecutions launched, with 987 persons actually prosecuted (in three states).

40. Enforcement: expediency and efficiency. On the issue of simultaneous identification, rehabilitation and initiation of legal proceedings against those engaging bonded labour, the Government indicates in its latest report that some of the state governments are apprehensive that the fear of punitive action may be counter-productive as it may deter the offenders from voluntarily cooperating in the identification process. The Committee observes that the identification process appears to have come to a halt while awaiting the voluntary cooperation of the offenders. The Committee notes the Government's further indication that filing of a criminal prosecution against an offender does not take any time, but, given the independent functioning of the judiciary, it is not possible for the administrative authorities to prescribe any time-limit for the conclusion of legal proceedings. In this connection, the Committee however also notes the Government's statement in its report received in June 1994 that section 21 of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, makes provision for the summary trial of offences under the Act. The Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will soon take the necessary action to ensure, in conformity with its obligation under Article 25 of the Convention, that adequate penal sanctions for the exaction of forced labour are imposed on the offenders and are strictly enforced. It hopes that the Government will supply information on the measures taken, as well as updated statistics on the numbers of proceedings brought and of convictions made, with an indication of the type of penalty imposed, as requested.

41. Legal aid. Further to a proposal made by the National Commission on Rural Labour, the Committee notes with interest the Government's indication in its report received in June 1994 that there are already in different states arrangements for providing legal aid to the poor and that further instructions will be given in this regard. It hopes that the Government will supply information on the action taken and its implications for the application of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. In this connection, recalling the proposal by the National Commission on Rural Labour that legal provisions be made for the enforcement of wage claims of discharged bonded labourers and the restoration of lands belonging to bonded labourers but usurped by moneylenders and bigger landowners on account of loans given at exorbitant rates of interest, the Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that the provisions of the Minimum Wages Act apply to wage claims by discharged bonded labourers and there already is a provision in the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, for restoration of the property of the bonded labourer after his release, free of encumbrances. The Committee hopes that the Government will supply details on practical measures taken, through legal aid schemes and otherwise, for the application in practice of the said legal provisions.

Children in bondage

42. In its previous comments the Committee referred to allegations brought before the United Nations Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities that children were in bondage in agriculture, brick kilns, stone quarries, carpet weaving, handlooms, matches and fireworks, glass bangles, diamond cutting and polishing; that child bondage and forced labour were connected with trafficking, kidnapping, repression, absence of freedom of movement, beating, sexual abuse, starvation, abnormal working hours and hazardous working conditions. The Committee noted the Government's indication that for the purpose of identification and rehabilitation by the machinery set up for this purpose no distinction is made between bonded child labour and bonded adult labour. Given however the particular vulnerability of children and their specific needs, the Committee asked for information on any specific measures taken for their identification, release and rehabilitation.

The Committee also asked for a comprehensive report on the situation of children in bondage.

43. Minimum wage. The Committee notes the Government's indication in its latest report that it is firmly committed to progressively eliminating the scourge of child labour. As part of the legislative action plan, the Government has decided to introduce a Bill in Parliament with a view to amending the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986. The proposal is to do away with any scope for minimum wage fixation which may tend to encourage child labour practice. The text of the Bill is being finalized in consultation with the competent ministry. The Committee looks forward to learning of the adoption of the Bill.

44. Law enforcement statistics. Although specific data on cases of forced labour of children are not collected and compiled, the Government points to an appreciable increase during the last two years in the number of inspections, prosecutions and convictions under the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, and the Factories Act, 1948. The Committee however notes from the detailed data supplied by the Government in June 1994 for the year 1993 and covering 15 states that prosecutions under the Child Labour Act were brought only in Uttar Pradesh (4,770), Tamil Nadu (16) and Maharashtra (37), with convictions reported only in Uttar Pradesh (567) and Tamil Nadu (2).

According to reports received from the state governments about 1,400 child bonded labourers have been identified. According to the National Sample Survey, 1987, the number of child labour is placed at 17.02 million. Of these, 2 million are estimated to be engaged in hazardous occupations.

The Prime Minister in his Independence Day address to the nation on 15 August 1994, announced a new scheme for rooting out the already illegal child labour practice in hazardous employments. Under this scheme, an estimated 2 million child labourers engaged in hazardous employments in India are sought to be taken out of the world of work by the year 2000.

45. Government action. On 1 October 1994 the National Authority for the Elimination of Child Labour (NAECL) was set up under the chairmanship of the Ministry of Labour. At its third meeting held on 16 January 1995, the NAECL adopted a blue-print for action to tackle the child labour problem titled "Identification, release and rehabilitation of child labour". A circular has been forwarded to the states/UTs for adoption.

The circular covers the range of actions required to tackle the child labour problem especially in hazardous occupations. It calls for the convergence of services and schemes of the central and state governments at the implementation level - the district level - to effectively coordinate the child labour elimination projects. Broadly, the effort aims at:

(a) better enforcement of laws intended for the protection of children;

(b) withdrawal of children from work and diverting them to special schools where they will be given primary level education, pre-vocational training, additional nutrition and stipends;

(c) covering parents of child labour through poverty alleviation and income-generation schemes to reduce the need to send their children to work;

(d) prevent fresh entry of children into the world of work by intensifying activities to provide pre-school education, health and nutrition to children in the 0-6 age group through schemes like Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), community nutrition programmes, etc.

The Government is actively pursuing the objective of complete elimination of child labour in the slate industry at Mandsaur (Madhya Pradesh) and the tile industry at Jaggampet (Andhra Pradesh). These two national child labour projects have been identified by the National Child Labour Advisory Committee.

46. The Committee looks forward to learning of the results of these schemes and action plans, as well as on the follow-up of the report of the subcommittee on elimination of child labour in the match and fireworks industry in Tamil Nadu, a copy of which was supplied by the Government in February 1995.

47. Protection against sexual exploitation. In its report received in June 1994, the Government indicated that all the state governments and union territory administrations had been advised to form advisory committees at the state level to take measures for the eradication of child prostitution and to devise and implement social welfare programmes for their care, protection, treatment, development and rehabilitation.

48. The Committee notes the Government's indication in its latest report that the state government of Uttar Pradesh is seized of the problem of alleged child prostitution and will conduct a survey in the affected areas. Some police stations with all-women staff have been set up, "rescue officers" have been posted in certain sensitive divisions to organize raids with police assistance for rescuing the victims and following up court cases. "Police gender sensitization" in training of police officers, shifting the burden of proof from the victim to the accused, involvement of NGOs in the rehabilitation of child prostitution victims are some of the points being considered to tackle the problem. On the specific allegation regarding auction and sexual exploitation of children, the district magistrates, Agra, Saharanpur and Varanasi have reported that no such case has come to light. In these three districts, during the last three years 57 raids were conducted, 465 suppression of immoral traffic cases were registered in courts and 131 cases ended up in conviction.

The Committee hopes that the Government will supply a copy of the survey to be made and information on further action taken in Uttar Pradesh as well as in other states and union territories.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

Referring to its observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following points:

1. The Committee notes that the IPEC Programme and Budget document for 1994-95 refers to the programme aimed at eliminating progressively child labour in the hazardous carpet weaving industry in Uttar Pradesh (which has a large number of bonded working children) through an integrated effort of stepping up the enforcement of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, and rehabilitating the children so withdrawn from work.

The Committee also notes that the government of Tamil Nadu has prepared a report laying down an approach for the complete elimination of child labour in the match and the fireworks industries.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress in enforcing the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, on penalties applied as well as on the steps taken for rehabilitation.

The Committee hopes that the government will provide a copy of the report by the government of Tamil Nadu.

2. The Committee also hopes that the Government will provide copies of the decisions by the High Court in writ petition No. 483 of 1987 and writ petition civil No. 12125 of 1984 when rendered.

3. In previous comments the Committee noted that during the discussions in the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery attention was drawn to the situation of children exploited as child prostitutes. It was alleged that these children were auctioned and sold like cattle, that there existed transit centres located near Agra, Saharanpur, Banaras, Calcutta, etc., certain regions being more "specialized" in girl child prostitution, others in homosexual trade.

The Committee expresses again the firm hope that the Government will provide informaton on these allegations and on any measures taken or contemplated to eradicate this form of forced labour and exploitation of children.

4. The Committee in its previous comments pointed out that the 1985 amendment to the Nagaland (Requisition of Porters) Act, 1965, did not modify the definition of "emergency" in section 2(a) of the Act which includes situations under which "movement of commodities, stores and equipment deemed essential to the life of the community or to the maintenance of the law and order or prevention of any threat to peace, to a place not connected by "'road' or rail is impeded for want of porters", or "movement of the police force, Assam Rifles or units of the regular armed forces to a place not connected by 'road' or rail to deal with a breach of the peace, or any threat to law or order, is impeded for want of porters to carry any essential items of equipment and baggage". The Committee requested the Government to take further action to limit resort to the requisition of porters to cases where it is necessary to deal with a calamity or threatened calamity endangering the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population. The Committee notes the Government's statement that since the recent Assembly elections in Nagaland, the matter had been taken up once again, on a priority basis, at the highest level with the Chief Minister of the government of Nagaland.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in this matter.

5. In its previous comments the Committee noted the text of the Navy Act and extracts from the Army Act, the Army Rules, the Air Force Act and the Air Force Rules dealing with the discharge of persons governed by these instruments. The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the practical application of the relevant provisions concerning termination of service on the personnel's own initiative, including statistical data of cases where applications for discharge were not accepted, as well as on any link made between the length of service and the period of free education or training received during or prior to the service in the armed forces.

The Committee notes the Government's information regarding the number of Naval personnel who left the service on their own initiative as well as cases where application for resignation was refused. The Committee would appreciate information on the reasons for such refusals.

The Committee also notes the government's renewed statement that regulations governing termination of service on own initiative are confidential. The Committee would however hope that the Government will be able to provide a copy of such regulations, so as to enable the Committee to ascertain the situation in relation to the freedom of this category of personnel in the service of the State to leave the service on their own initiative after a reasonable time, either at specified intervals or by giving notice.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. The Committee has however taken note of the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee in 1993 and of the discussion which took place in the Committee.

In its previous comments the Committee referred to the situation in law and in practice concerning the abolition of bonded labour.

The Committee notes the Government's statement to the Conference Committee that a high level of awareness exists about the problem of bonded labour. The will of the Government and of the people to eradicate this problem can be seen in the existence of legislative provisions banning debt bondage, effective follow-up executive action, judicial remedies, discussion in Parliamant and in state legislatures, adequate publicity given by the media and the voluntary agencies active in this field.

The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it referred to identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers as well as to the role of vigilance committees, enforcement of law, the possible institution of an authority on bonded labour, and to child bondage. The Committee took into consideration the report by the National Commission on Rural Labour (1991), the report by the Commissionner on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (1987-1989) and the Programme of Action against child bondage adopted at the Asian Regional Seminar on Children in Bondage (23-26 November 1992).

Identification

The Government referred in 1992 to circular instructions highlighting the need to undertake fresh efforts for identification, in particular through household surveys, censuses, and intensive studies in stone quarries and brick kilns.

The Committee notes the Government's statement to the Conference Committee that the recommendations of the National Commission on Rural Labour have been forwarded to the ministries and departments of the central Government for examination in consultation with state governments who were also provided with copies for examination and implementation. Progress was reviewed periodically. The Government indicated that a meeting held by the Union Minister of State for Labour with the labour secretaries from the states where the problem of bonded labour is endemic concluded that a new survey of bonded labour should be carried out in those states and that they should endeavour to complete the study by September 1993.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results achieved as well as a copy of any such surveys when completed.

The Committee also notes from the report by the National Commission on Rural Labour that in the following non-agricultural occupations bonded labour elements have been noticed but have not been adequately covered by surveys and studies: stone quarries, migrant labourers, brick kilns, Joginis and Devadasis, fishermen, building and road construction labour, forest labour, bidi workers, carpet weavers, potters, weavers, head loaders, child labour in match and fireworks industries, carpet weaving etc. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any studies or surveys made in these activities and on the number of bonded labourers identified, released and rehabilitated. It hopes that the Government will furnish a copy of any such studies or surveys.

Role of vigilance committees

The Committee noted previously that the report of the National Commission on Rural Labour indicated that most vigilance committees had not been constituted or reconstituted or had not been active as meetings were not held regularly and their functioning had not been monitored. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would take action so as to be able to monitor the existence and functioning of vigilance committees and provide information on their work, including any initiatives taken by them or suggested to the state governments to ensure that these committees function effectively and contribute to the abolition of bonded labour.

The Committee notes that the Government has referred to the following information made available by some states:

Gujarat: (19 district level and 44 subdivisional vigilance committees constituted; a state level screening committee established for scrutinizing); Maharastra: (out of 31 district and 106 subdivisions: 27 district-level and 19 subdivisional committees constituted); Uttar Pradesh: (out of 63 districts and 294 subdivisions: 54 district-level and 220 subdivisional committees constituted); Karnataka: (vigilance committees have been constituted in districts where there is concentration of bonded labour: 9 out of 20 districts. An information system was set up to keep a close watch on rural areas to identify bonded labour; the committees headed by district magistrates are composed, among others, of representaives of scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, social workers, non-official agencies and financial institutions); Haryana: (out of 16 districts and 39 subdivisions: 12 district-level and 35 subdivisional committees).

The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to provide information on the functioning of these committees and on the effective implementation of the competences entrusted to them by the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, for the identification, liberation and rehabilitation of bonded labourers.

The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the establishment of vigilance committees and their functioning in the states of Andra Pradesh, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu.

Rehabilitation

The Committee notes that in its statement to the Conference the Government representative referred to rehabilitation grants which are land based, non-land based and skill-craft-based. The Government indicated that the Act provided for restoration of property to bonded labourers after their release.

The Committee observes that it has referred previously to the different rehabilitation grants and their integration into other poverty alleviation programmes. The Committee noted that the National Commission on Rural Labour pointed to shortcomings, such as the considerable time-lag between liberation and rehabilitation and poor follow-up on rehabilitation leading to misery and relapse into bondage; non-integration of the rehabilitation schemes with other anti-poverty schemes; poor quality of land in the land-based scheme; no rehabilitation attempt for migrant bonded labourers either in the state in which they work nor in their state of origin, etc. The National Commission stressed the need to improve rehabilitation measures qualitatively and to rectify the shortcomings. It proposed for instance that the scheme of rehabilitation be chosen in consultation with the beneficiary and be well planned; lands be of reasonably good quality in the case of land-based schemes; the rehabilitation grant be given in full and the maximum amount be increased; the jurisdiction banks be directed to provide consumption loans, since the predominant cause for lapsing into bondage is indebtedness largely for consumption needs; legal provisions be made for restoration of lands belonging to the bonded labourers but usurped by moneylenders and bigger landowners on account of loans given at exorbitant rates of interest.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on measures taken or envisaged to improve the quality of rehabilitation, taking into consideration the proposals by the National Commission on Rural Labour.

The Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government concerning the numbers of bonded labourers identified and those rehabilitated and the targets for 1993-94. The Committee notes that in certain states large numbers of identified bonded labourers still are to be rehabilitated. Thus, in the State of Andhra Pradesh, out of 35,934 bonded labourers identified, 25,753 have been rehabilitated and 10,181 still remain to be rehabilitated but regretfully the tentative target for rehabilitation during 1993-94 is only 1,000.

The Committee hopes that the necessary measures will be taken to accelerate the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. The Government may also consider channelling its rehabilitation measures through voluntary agencies having field experience and working at grass-root level.

In relation to the involvement of such voluntary agencies, the Committee notes that certain state governments have provided information to the central Government: some have indicated that the involvement proved not necessary, or was not effective; others mentioned that assistance was requested from some voluntary agencies in the identification process and that the results achieved were impressive. The Committee notes the Government's opinion that the involvement of trade unions would prove to be unworkable since most bonded labourers are found in the unorganized sector.

The Committee requests the Government to provide further information as regards the situation in those states where the involvement of voluntary agencies was found by the state governments not to be necessary or not effective. It requests the Government to provide information on the number of bonded labourers still in bondage, the number of bonded labourers identified and released and the number of those rehabilitated in these states.

Proposal for the institution of a national authority on bonded labour

In its previous comments the Committee noted that the Government did not envisage at this stage following the recommendation of the National Commission on Rural Labour to set up a national authority on bonded labour. The Committee had noted that a Bill to establish a Commission on Human Rights was being submitted to Parliament and considered that this Commission might be entrusted with questions concerning bonded labour.

The Committee notes that a National Human Rights Commission has been established in October 1993 under the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. Its scope of activity is however limited to violations of human rights committed by agents of the State and does not extend to violations by private individuals, companies, etc.

The Committee recalls that forced labour, and in particular, bonded labour, is, in practice, mostly exacted by private individuals, companies, etc. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures envisaged to extend the competences of the Commission accordingly or to establish a National Commission on Bonded Labour.

Enforcement

The Committee noted in its previous comments from the report of the National Commission on Rural Labour that there had been very few prosecutions against persons keeping labour in bondage. The National Commission stressed that the process of identification and release and bringing of criminal proceedings should, as far as possible, be simultaneous activities, and made a certain number of proposals to improve the situation.

The Committee notes the Government's statement to the Conference Committee that criminal prosecution had to be based on due process of law and could not be done within artificial time-limits. The Committee would like to know how much time is required by due process of law under national conditions in order to file a criminal prosecution.

Noting that the Act abolishing the bonded labour system was adopted in 1976 and referring to the National Commission on Rural Labour's assessment, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken to ensure due process of law. The Committee recalls that under Article 25 of the Convention, the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and the Government must ensure that penalties imposed are really adequate and strictly enforced. Noting also that the penal sanctions provided by the Act of 1976 include, besides prison of up to three years, a rather meaningless fine up to 2,000 rupees, the Committee hopes that the Governemnt will provide information on measures taken to ensure the effective punishment of offenders indicating, in particular, the number of proceedings and of convictions as well as penalties imposed since the Act of 1976 was brought into force.

Children in bondage

In its previous comments the Committee referred to allegations brought before the United Nations Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities that children were in bondage in agriculture, brick kilns, stone quarries, carpet weaving, handlooms, matches and fireworks, glass bangles, diamond cutting and polishing; that child bondage and forced labour were connected with trafficking, kidnapping, repression, absence of freedom of movement, beating, sexual abuse, starvation, abnormal working hours and hazardous working conditions.

Children are required to work beyond their physical capacity, in occupations endangering their health, their safety, their physical and psychological development, for long working hours which interfere with their education, recreation and rest, mostly for less than meagre wages not commensurate with the quantum of work done; children work in conditions of exploitation which bear no resemblance to a free employment relationship. They are exploited because they are young and helpless, they are deprived of the right to lead a normal childhood, deprived of education, deprived of a future.

The Committee noted that the Asian Regional Seminar on Children in Bondage (23-26 November 1992), in which India participated, had formulated and adopted a Programme of Action against child bondage. According to this programme, the struggle against child bondage requires a firm political commitment - a clear and unambiguous declaration against bondage - a comprehensive national policy and a programme of action covering legislative reforms, effective enforcement and a system of compulsory and free education, sustained by community mobilization and information campaigns.

The Committee notes that the legislative action plan, included in the National Policy on Child Labour adopted in 1987, aims inter alia at enforcing the legislative provisions of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, the Factories Act 1948 and the Mines Act 1952; provides that the Government will bring forward legislation to delete the provision contained in the Minimum Wages Act allowing different wages to be fixed for children, adolescents and adults. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide the text of any provisions adopted to this effect. Noting also that the plan specifies that the central and state inspection machinery will be geared up, the Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the results achieved in the detection of forced labour exploitation of children through improved labour inspection, and on the number of cases of forced labour exploitation of children noted.

Noting also the information contained in the International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) Implementation Report (1992-93), that the Government is considering an amendment under which employers would have to pay the same minimum wage to a child as to an adult, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures adopted to this end.

The Committee notes from the same report that there is an increased awareness among central and state governments and legislatures, as well as the media, on the issues related to child labour and that trade unions also have begun to take interest in the question. The Committee also notes the statement by the Government to the Conference Committee that in 1993 the National Child Labour Advisory Committee had identified two national projects for the complete elimination of child labour in one year. A programme of training of labour inspectors had been initiated in cooperation with IPEC which was to cover 600 inspectors. The Committee would like to know what steps have been taken towards implementation of the two national projects identified as above.

The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the results achieved through the aforementioned initiatives. The Committee notes the Government's indication that for the purpose of identification and rehabilitation by the machinery set up for this purpose no distinction is made between bonded child labour and bonded adult labour. Given however the particular vulnerability of children and their specific needs, the Committee would request the Government to provide information on any specific measures taken or envisaged for their identification, release and rehabilitation.

The Committee trusts that the Government will provide a comprehensive report on the situation of children in bondage, on goals defined and strategies adopted as well as on measures of implementation (including surveys, studies, statements, etc.). Law enforcement requires the political will of the Government to provide the necessary means for effective action. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on inspections carried out, and their results, on prosecutions made and penalties imposed.

[The Government is asked to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1994.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

Referring also to its observation under the Convention the Committee notes the information and documentation provided by the Government.

1. The Committee noted that the MUKTI-NIKETAN submitted an "Alternate Scheme of Self-Development of the Released Bonded Labourers" in the Supreme Court of India on being invited to do so in a public interest litigation (writ petition No. 483 of 1987). The Committee notes the Government's information in its report that this petition is "sub judice". The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the outcome of this procedure. It would also appreciate information on other writ petitions before the Supreme Court and the State High Courts relating to bonded labour, in particular where questions of principle were involved.

2. In previous comments the Committee noted that during the discussions in the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery attention was drawn to the situation of children exploited as child prostitutes. It was alleged that these children were auctioned and sold like cattle, that there existed transit centres located near Agra, Saharanpur, Banaras, Calcutta, etc., certain regions being more "specialized" in girl child prostitution, others in homosexual trade.

The Committee expresses again the hope that the Government will provide information on these allegations and on any measures taken or contemplated to eradicate this form of forced labour and exploitation of children.

3. The Committee in its previous comments pointed out that the 1985 amendment to the Nagaland (Requisition of Porters) Act, 1965, did not modify the definition of "emergency" in section 2(a) of the Act which includes situations under which "movement of commodities, stores and equipment deemed essential to the life of the community or to the maintenance of the law and order or prevention of any threat to peace, to a place not connected by "'road' or rail is impeded for want of porters", or "movement of the Police Force, Assam Rifles or Units of the regular armed forces to a place not connected by 'road' or rail to deal with a breach of the peace, or any threat to law or order, is impeded for want of porters to carry any essential items of equipment and baggage". The Committee requested the Government to take further action to limit resort to the requisition of porters to cases where it is necessary to deal with a calamity or threatened calamity endangering the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population. The Committee notes the Government's statement that the state government has been advised to rescind the relevant provisions of the law so as to conform to the provisions of the Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the action taken.

4. In its previous comments the Committee noted the text of the Navy Act and extracts from the Army Act, the Army Rules, the Air Force Act and the Air Force Rules dealing with the discharge of persons governed by these instruments. The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the practical application of the relevant provisions concerning termination of service on the personnel's own initiative, including statistical data of cases where applications for discharge were not accepted, as well as on any link made between the length of service and the period of free education or training received during or prior to the service in the armed forces.

The Committee notes the statistics on permanent retirement in respect of officers in the Air Force and airmen during the years 1989 to 1991. The Committee also notes the Government's statement in its report that regulations governing termination of service on own initiative are confidential. The Committee would however hope that the Government will provide a copy of the provisions governing terms of service and discharge of officers and airmen, so that the Committee will be in a position to ascertain the situation in relation to the application of the Convention.

The Committee notes that information in regard to defence personnel in the navy and the army is being collected; the Defence Service Regulations, 1962, and the Navy Regulations are out of print, but efforts are being made to obtain these regulations for communication to the ILO.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide the information in question.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes that more than 15 years have passed since the authorities of India took the decision to abolish the bonded labour system in 1976; that ten years have elapsed since the Supreme Court adopted its landmark decision in 1983. Yet the situation in practice does not appear to have improved very much. The National Commission on Rural Labour has made a number of proposals and recommendations with a view to improving the situation. The Committee requests the Government to inform it of any action taken or envisaged with a view to implementing these proposals and recommendations.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee in 1992 and the discussion which took place in the Committee.

The Committee has also taken note of the report of the National Commission on Rural Labour, published by the Government of India in 1991, as well as of the report of the Commissioner on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (29th Report, 1987-89), documents which were provided by the Government with the information submitted to the Conference Committee. The Commision on Rural Labour established in 1987 was entrusted to examine in depth the national and region-specific problems of rural labour, with comprehensive terms of reference which included matters concerning bondage. The Commission submitted its report on 31 July 1991; its findings and recommendations on bonded labour are reflected in Chapter 8. The Commission characterizes bonded labour as an "age-old inhuman system" which "combines the worst and extreme features of exploitation and discrimination".

The Committee has further taken note of the Programme of Action against Child Bondage adopted by the participants in the Asian Regional Seminar on Children in Bondage, which was held in Islamabad, Pakistan, from 23 to 26 November 1992.

Abolition of bonded labour

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matters raised in its previous direct request:

1. Bonded labour. Referring to its observation under the Convention the Committee again requests the Government to provide information and documentation concerning the following points:

(a) The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether voluntary agencies such as the Bonded Liberation Front are involved in the programme of rehabilitation of freed bonded labourers, which other agencies are involved and, if so, in what manner.

(b) The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any steps or measures taken by the Union or State Governments as follow-up action to ascertain whether the freed bonded labourers are leading a free, normal existence or have again fallen back into bondage and to furnish any statistics in this regard.

(c) The Committee notes that the MUKTI-NIKETAN has submitted an "Alternate Scheme of Self-Development of the Released Bonded Labourers" in the Supreme Court of India on being invited to do so in a public interest litigation (writ petition No. 483 of 1987). The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the outcome of the litigation including the text of the decision by the Supreme Court. It would also appreciate information on other writ petitions before the Supreme Court and the State High Courts relating to bonded labour, in particular where questions of principle were involved.

(d) The Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report copies of the latest reports by the Commissioner on Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, by the National Commission on Rural Labour and by the Child Labour Technical Advisory Committee.

2. The Committee noted that during the discussions in the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery attention has been drawn to the situation of children exploited as child prostitutes. It is alleged that these children are auctioned and sold like cattle, that there exist transit centres located near Agra, Saharanpur, Banaras, Calcutta etc., certain regions being more "specialised" in girl child prostitution, others in homosexual trade.

The Committee again requests the Government to provide detailed information on these allegations and on any measures taken or contemplated, including prosecutions, to eradicate this form of forced labour and exploitation of children.

3. The Committee in its previous comments pointed out that the 1985 amendment to the Nagaland (Requisition of Porters) Act, 1965, did not modify the definition of "emergency" in section 2(a) of the Act which includes situations under which "movement of commodities, stores and equipment deemed essential to the life of the community or to the maintenance of the law and order or prevention of any threat to peace, to a place not connected by "'road' or rail is impeded for want of porters", or "movement of the Police Force, Assam Rifles or Units of the regular armed forces to a place not connected by 'road' or rail to deal with a breach of the peace, or any threat to law or order, is impeded for want of porters to carry any essential items of equipment and baggage". The Committee requested the Government to take further action to limit resort to the requisition of porters to cases where it is necessary to deal with a calamity or threatened calamity endangering the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population. The Committee noted the Government's renewed statement in its report for the period ending June 1989 that the Committee's comments had been brought to the notice of the State Government of Nagaland. It again expresses the hope that the Government will soon be in a position to indicate that the necessary action has been taken to amend the legislation so as to ensure the observance of the Convention.

4. In its previous direct request the Committee noted the text of the Navy Act and extracts from the Army Act, the Army Rules, the Air Force Act and the Air Force Rules dealing with the discharge of persons governed by these instruments. The Committee noted the Government's statement in its report for the period ending 30 June 1989 that the Defence Service Regulations, 1962 and Navy Regulations are still under revision and will be communicated in due course. The Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the practical application of the relevant provisions concerning termination of service on the personnel's own initiative including statistical data of cases where applications for discharge were not accepted. The Committee would appreciate communication of information on any link made between the length of service and the period of free education or training received during or prior to the service in the armed forces.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes that no report has been received from the Government. The Committee has however taken note of the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee in 1991.

The Committee has also noted the report of a fact-finding committee appointed by Order of the Supreme Court dated 1 August 1991, in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 12125 of 1984.

The Committee has also taken note of the discussions in the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery of the United Nations Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities at its 16th Session, July-August 1991.

Abolition of bonded labour

In its observation of 1991, the Committee examined in detail the situation in law and in practice concerning abolition of bonded labour.

1. Scope of legislation. The Committee recalled that under article 23(1) of the Constitution of India, traffic in human beings and "begar" and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and that by virtue of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, No. 19 of 1976, the bonded labour system was abolished. The scope of this Act was clarified by a judgement of 16 December 1983 of the Supreme Court of India and by amendments adopted in 1985.

The Committee notes the Government's statement to the Conference Committee that, pursuant to the Supreme Court's judgement of 16 December 1983, a committee to investigate the issue of identifying bonded labourers had been instituted in the State of Haryana; it was in the process of finalising its report for submission to the Supreme Court.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide full information on the findings and recommendations of the above-mentioned committee as well as a copy of its report.

2. Identification, freeing and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. Concerning the number of bonded labourers, the Committee previously referred to estimates according to which there were around 2 to 2.6 million bonded labourers in agriculture or the rural sector (1981, Gandhi Peace Foundation in cooperation with the National Labour Institute - estimates for 11 out of 21 states; 1979, Subcommission of Bonded Labour set up by the Central Standing Committee on Rural Unorganised Labour) and the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes considered that bonded labour existed also in other areas such as quarrying, weaving, domestic service; the existence of bonded labour in quarrying and weaving was confirmed by the Supreme Court judgement of 1983 and by the Commissioner appointed by the court on working conditions of child labour in the carpets industry of Mirzapur.

The Committee notes that in the information submitted to the Conference Committee in 1991, the Government repeats its previous statements that it did not accept these estimates as it considers that the methodology applied is based on extrapolation of samples not adequately representative. The Government recalled its various statements that state governments were primarily responsible for identification and rehabilitation; that they had been advised to conduct surveys so as to identify all bonded labourers as early as possible; that on 31 March 1989, 242,532 bonded labourers had been identified and on 31 March 1990, 245,636 of which 218,028 had been rehabilitated.

The Committee notes that the Report of the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery refers to information submitted by Anti-Slavery International that debt bondage affected almost 5 million adults and 10 million children.

The Committee observes that a large and developed infrastructure for collection of statistics appears to exist in the country, as mentioned by the Government during the general debate in the Conference Committee in 1991. The Committee hopes that the central and state Governments will avail themselves of the existing means to accelerate the identification of bonded labourers.

Referring to the assurances given by the Government to the Conference Committee that updated information would be submitted on all issues and recalling also the Government's previous statement that active involvement of trade unions and social organisations is crucially important, the Committee hopes that the Government will report on measures taken and results achieved in the identification of bonded labour.

The Committee previously took note of a certain number of plans and schemes adopted for the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, either directed specifically towards bonded labour or integrating bonded labour as one of their components. In regard to the implementation of the 1976 Act, in particular in relation to these different programmes and initiatives, the Committee, taking into account extracts from the report by the Subcommittee of the Parliamentary Committee attached to the Ministry of Labour, noted a certain number of points on which it requested the Government to provide information.

(a) Identification and the role of vigilance committees. Referring to the reported slowness of the process of identification and to section 14 of the 1976 Act calling for the institution of vigilance committees, the Committee requested the Government to provide detailed information on the institution, the activities carried out and the results achieved by vigilance committees and the funds made available to the vigilance committees for this purpose as well as on steps taken by the central and the state Governments to support and promote their activities, and on any studies conducted to ascertain the real number of bonded labourers which remain to be identified and rehabilitated.

The Committee notes the Government's statement to the Conference Committee that vigilance committees played indeed an important role, and had been constituted in almost every state at the district and subdivisional level; those already set up were advising the district or subdivisional magistrates and were making efforts to identify, release and rehabilitate bonded labourers. The Government had not received any information from these committees or the state governments regarding problems encountered in the identification and rehabilitation process. The Government had also not taken any specific steps for providing incentives to the vigilance committees, nor had it received any proposals from the state governments in this regard. No further studies or surveys in this regard had been carried out. However, as and when complaints were received regarding the existence of bonded labourers, inquiries were made to ascertain the nature or existence of such a system and steps were taken to release and rehabilitate the labourers involved.

Noting also the Government's previous indications that state governments had been asked to ensure that vigilance committees are constituted, hold regular meetings and maintain and keep registers, the Committee hopes that the Government will provide the detailed information requested by the Committee in its 1991 comments, including reports and studies made.

(b) Scheme for the involvement of voluntary agencies. The Committee referred in its previous comments to the scheme for the involvement of voluntary agencies in the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, launched in October 1987, under which voluntary agencies may be given subsidies (a lump sum as a managerial subsidy plus a certain sum for each release order in excess of 20 up to a specified maximum).

The Committee notes the Government's statement to the Conference Committee that so far there had been two cases of voluntary agencies who had come forward to claim the managerial subsidy for the year 1989-90. However, when such voluntary agencies brought to the notice of the Government the existence of bonded labourers in an area they covered, efforts were made to obtain the release of the persons involved and to rehabilitate them suitably.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate how many agencies it has contacted and what was their response, and in what way the Government takes steps to include the voluntary agencies operating in this field and seeks their assistance.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide details on further cases and, as previously requested, information on the operation of the scheme and on the results achieved, indicating in particular to what extent this scheme has accelerated the process of identification and rehabilitation, its efficiency, improvements envisaged and any comments and suggestions made by the voluntary agencies concerned, such as the Bonded Labour Liberation Front, including reports by such agencies or from official sources.

(c) Scheme for rehabilitation. In its 1991 observation the Committee referred in detail to the centrally sponsored scheme for the rehabilitation of bonded labour and the amount and timing of the rehabilitation grant given to each bonded labourer. Since the timely rehabilitation of identified and freed bonded labourers is of the utmost importance, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to accelerate the process of rehabilitation of the identified bonded labourers, in order in particular to reduce the danger that newly freed bonded labourers may fall back into bondage through lack of means of subsistence. The Committee hopes that the Government will indicate the categories of activities in which released bonded labourers are rehabilitated and the mechanism which exists for the follow-up of the rehabilitation measures.

(d) Integration of the scheme for rehabilitation with other anti-poverty schemes. The Committee referred previously to the problems encountered and shortcomings noted in relation to the application of the central Government's instructions for the integration of the scheme for rehabilitation of bonded labour with other anti-poverty programmes (such as the National Rural Employment Programme, the Rural Landless Employment Generation Programme, the Integrated Rural Development Programme).

Since the nature and the adequacy of rehabilitation is extremely important, the Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will provide detailed information on any action plans adopted to promote the integration of the bonded labour scheme with other anti-poverty schemes, on measures effectively carried out and on results achieved.

(e) Proposal for the institution of a national commission on bonded labour. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on any steps taken to institute a commission entrusted with the monitoring of the implementation of the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976.

3. Enforcement of sanctions. Under Article 25 of the Convention, the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and the Government must ensure that penalties imposed by law are really adequate and strictly enforced. Under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, compulsion to render bonded labour, advancement of bonded debt, enforcement of any custom, tradition, contract, agreement or other instrument requiring any service to be rendered under the bonded labour system, are punishable with imprisonment for up to three years and a fine of up to Rs.2,000 (sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Act); the Act provides for various measures to be taken by state authorities to ensure punishment of offenders. The Committee had previously noted that few cases of imprisonment had been reported and it requested the Government, in view of the gravity of the problem, to take effective measures to secure the rigourous application of the laws prohibiting and punishing bonded labour.

The Committee noted the Government's indication in its report for the period ending June 1989 that the Union Labour Minister had stressed to the state governments the need to launch prosecutions against bonded labour keepers immediately after identification and release of bonded labourers and that in order to avoid any misuse of the allocation of the pecuniary grants, the central Government had made it clear that if a fresh identification of bonded labour was not accompanied by the launching of prosecution against the bonded labour keeper, the Government might refuse to pay its share of money for rehabilitation. The Committee again requests the Government to provide information on the results achieved by these measures which are intended to avoid corruption and misappropriation of funds but which at the same time must not adversely affect the process of identification, freeing and rehabilitation of bonded labour.

The Committee had previously also taken note of the information provided to the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery at its 14th Session concerning actions brought before the Supreme Court of India by social action groups which resulted for instance in the release of several thousand bonded labourers in April-May 1988 in the district of Raipur. The Committee again expresses the hope that the Government will provide detailed information on the actions brought before the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts of the different states concerning bonded labour, the decisions taken by the Courts and the implementation of these decisions by state authorities. It also again requests the Government to provide information including statistics on the number of prosecutions made and sanctions imposed and any other relevant information enabling the Committee to assess the efficiency of the enforcement mechanisms.

The Committee notes the information provided to the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery at its 16th Session by Anti-Slavery International that the committee to investigate the situation of bonded labour in Haryana had submitted its report to the Supreme Court in June 1991, and had identified more than 2,000 bonded labourers needing rehabilitation (whereas the Government of Haryana had denied the existence of bonded labour in the State). The Committee hopes that the Government will communicate a copy of this report.

Child bonded labour

4. In its previous comments the Committee took note of the discussions in the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery of the United Nations Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minoritories at its 14th and 15th Sessions, 1989 and 1990. The Committee noted that the reports of the Working Group (doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1989/39 of 28 August 1989 and E/CN.4/Sub.2/1990/44 of 23 August 1990) referred to information provided by Anti-Slavery International concerning child labour in relation to debt bondage in the South Asian countries; this information is set out in the report of the South Asian Seminar on Child Servitude held in June-July 1989 and attended by representatives of non-governmental organisations from five countries. In relation to the situation in India, the report refers to children in bondage in numerous occupations, stating that debt bondage, force or compulsion are common to almost all categories of child labour. According to the estimates contained in the report several million children, between the ages of 5 and 14, are in chronic bondage in agriculture; around a million in the brick kiln, stone quarry and construction industries; hundreds of thousands in carpet-weaving, handlooms, match and fire works, glass bangles, diamond-cutting and polishing, as well as in lock-making. Child bondage and forced labour are connected with the trafficking and kidnapping of children, repression, absence of freedom of movement, beating, sex abuse, starvation, abnormal working hours, unhygienic and dangerous working conditions, and exposure of the children to grave health hazards.

According to the report, constitutional and legislative provisions adopted to protect the children exist, but are not applied and the situation in practice of bonded children is not improving: for instance in the Mirzapur Bhadohi belt, the carpet-weaving region in Uttar Pradesh, organised rackets of kidnapping or luring away of children and forcing them to weave are continuing.

It is alleged that despite sanctions provided in the legislation, exploiters have no fear of being punished or penalised, since the enforcement machinery is weak and the indolence of the authorities, and collusion and corruption hamper identification, release and rehabilitation of the bonded children.

The Committee notes the report of the fact-finding committee appointed on 1 August 1991 by Order of the Supreme Court of India in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 12125 of 1984.

The inquiry was conducted in villages of the carpet-weaving region in the south-east of the State of Uttar Pradesh and in Bihar, in particular in the so-called Mirzapur-Bhadohi belt. It gives extensive descriptions of the bonded child labourers and their conditions and contains lists and photos of released children and certificates of release.

The Committee notes that the fact-finding committee has referred, inter alia, to the following cases:

- a large number of children, some in the age groups 6 to 9, work as bonded labourers in carpet-weaving looms;

- many are brought from the outside, especially from Bihar; sometimes children are lured by "gangs";

- when parents get advance money the contractor, weaver and keeper reduce the already very small wage of the child for fines, punishments, mistakes; the interest on the advanced sum continues growing and the child is forced to stay on;

- in many instances children are kept under close watch, not allowed to go outside or have contacts or talk to persons when in the street;

- children work long hours; some, when failing to work or making mistakes, are kept in closed rooms, sometimes tortured;

- children who tried to escape were beaten or even tortured;

- children who are exposed to hazards in particular cutting their fingers, are put forcibly to work after a small rest.

The fact-finding committee has made several proposals to improve the situation: compulsory registration of the looms; raids to liberate children if the infrastructure for rehabilitation is readily available; strict enforcement of the Abolition of Bonded Labour Act; measures to ensure that the amounts granted on release are used for effective rehabilitation and are not misappropriated.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide a copy of the Supreme Court's decision in this case as well as information on action taken following the decision of the Court. The Committee, referring to Article 25 of the Convention, requests the Government to provide full information on measures adopted or contemplated to eradicate forced labour of children.

The Committee hopes that the Government, taking into consideration also the Committee's detailed comments of 1991 under the Convention, will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

[The Government is requested to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1992.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

1. Bonded labour. Referring to its observation under the Convention the Committee requests the Government to provide information and documentation concerning the following points:

(a) Referring to point 2(b) and (c) of its observation under the Convention the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether voluntary agencies such as the Bonded Liberation Front are involved in the programme of rehabilitation of freed bonded labourers, which other agencies are involved and, if so, in what manner.

(b) The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any steps or measures taken by the Union or State Governments as follow-up action to ascertain whether the freed bonded labourers are leading a free, normal existence or have again fallen back into bondage and to furnish any statistics in this regard.

(c) The Committee notes that the MUKTI-NIKETAN has submitted an "Alternate Scheme of Self-Development of the Released Bonded Labourers" in the Supreme Court of India on being invited to do so in a public interest litigation (writ petition No. 483 of 1987). The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the outcome of the litigation including the text of the decision by the Supreme Court. It would also appreciate information on other writ petitions before the Supreme Court and the State High Courts relating to bonded labour, in particular where questions of principle were involved.

(d) The Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report copies of the latest reports by the Commissioner on Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, by the National Commission on Rural Labour and by the Child Labour Technical Advisory Committee.

2. The Committee notes that during the discussions in the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery attention has been drawn to the situation of children exploited as child prostitutes. It is alleged that these children are auctioned and sold like cattle, that there exist transit centres located near Agra, Saharanpur, Banaras, Calcutta etc., certain regions being more "specialised" in girl child prostitution, others in homosexual trade.

The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on these allegations and on any measures taken or contemplated, including prosecutions, to eradicate this form of forced labour and exploitation of children.

3. The Committee in its previous comments pointed out that the 1985 amendment to the Nagaland (Requisition of Porters) Act, 1965, did not modify the definition of "emergency" in section 2(a) of the Act which includes situations under which "movement of commodities, stores and equipment deemed essential to the life of the community or to the maintenance of the law and order or prevention of any threat to peace, to a place not connected by "'road' or rail is impeded for want of porters", or "movement of the Police Force, Assam Rifles or Units of the regular armed forces to a place not connected by 'road' or rail to deal with a breach of the peace, or any threat to law or order, is impeded for want of porters to carry any essential items of equipment and baggage". The Committee requested the Government to take further action to limit resort to the requisition of porters to cases where it is necessary to deal with a calamity or threatened calamity endangering the existence or the well-being of the whole or part of the population. The Committee notes the Government's renewed statement in its report that the Committee's comments have been brought to the notice of the State Government of Nagaland. It hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to indicate that the necessary action has been taken to amend the legislation so as to ensure the observance of the Convention.

4. In its previous direct request the Committee noted the text of the Navy Act and extracts from the Army Act, the Army Rules, the Air Force Act and the Air Force Rules dealing with the discharge of persons governed by these instruments. The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that the Defence Service Regulations, 1962 and Navy Regulations are still under revision and will be communicated in due course. The Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the practical application of the relevant provisions concerning termination of service on the personnel's own initiative including statistical data of cases where applications for discharge were not accepted. The Committee would appreciate communication of information on any link made between the length of service and the period of free education or training received during or prior to the service in the armed forces.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

Referring to its previous comments on the situation in law and in practice concerning the abolition of bonded labour, the Committee notes the Government's report for the period ending June 1989, including extracts of the report by a subcommittee of the Parliamentary Consultative Committee attached to the Ministry of Labour, as well as the discussion which took place in the Conference Committee in June 1989. It has also taken note of the discussions in the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery of the United Nations Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities at its 14th and 15th Sessions, 1989 and 1990.

Abolition of bonded labour

1. Scope of the legislation. The Committee has previously noted that under article 23(1) of the Constitution of India, traffic in human beings and "begar" and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and punishable in accordance with the law. Under section 4(1) of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, No. 19 of 1976 the bonded labour system shall stand abolished and every bonded labourer shall stand freed and discharged from any obligation to render any bonded labour; under section 2(f) "bonded labourer" means a labourer who incurs, or has incurred, a bonded debt, i.e. an advance obtained, or presumed to have been obtained, by a bonded labourer under, or in pursuance of the bonded labour system (section 2(d)); the definition of "bonded labour system" given in section 2(g) refers, inter alia, to customary or social obligations and birth in any particular caste or community as possible reasons for bondage. In its judgement of 16 December 1983, the Supreme Court of India rejected the argument by the State of Haryana that in the absence of a debt certain labourers may be providing forced labour, but are not bonded labourers within the meaning of the 1976 Act, and the State would thus not be compelled to rehabilitate them. The Supreme Court pointed out that under section 12 of the Act it shall be the duty of every District Magistrate to inquire whether any bonded labour system or other form of forced labour is exacted and, if so, to take the necessary action to eradicate such forced labour. The scope of the Act was further clarified by amendments adopted in 1985. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information in relation to the scope of legislation on the abolition of bonded labour.

2. Identification, freeing and rehabilitation of bonded labourers. Concerning the number of bonded labourers the Committee referred previously to estimates made in 1981 by the Gandhi Peace Foundation in co-operation with the National Labour Institute which held that there were some 2.6 million bonded labourers in the agricultural sector alone (in 11 out of 21 States) and to the 1979 report of the Subcommission on Bonded Labour set up by the Central Standing Committee on Rural Unorganised Labour, which referred to some two million bonded labourers in the rural sector. The Committee also noted that the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes considered that the practice of bonded labour existed also in other areas than in agriculture such as quarrying, weaving, domestic services, etc. The existence of bonded labour in quarrying and weaving was confirmed by the above-mentioned Supreme Court judgement of 16 December 1983 and the report of the Commissioner appointed by the Supreme Court on the working conditions of child labour in the carpet units of Mirzapur.

The Committee notes the Government's renewed statement in its report and to the Conference Committee in 1989 that it has not accepted any of the estimates of the number of bonded labourers inter alia because there had been wide variations in the interpretation of the scope of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, all the estimates having been made before the adoption of the amendments to clarify the Act. The Committee notes however in this connection that the Supreme Court's judgement of December 1983 and the 1985 amendments, far from restricting the scope of the Act, have, on the contrary, stated that forced labour also comes under the purview of the Act. Thus they would tend to revise the earlier estimates upwards rather than downwards.

The Government indicated to the Conference Committee in 1989 that 242,532 bonded labourers had been identified, among whom 218,272 had been rehabilitated as of March 1989, the Government's target being to rehabilitate all the identified bonded labourers by March 1990; if new bonded labourers were identified they would be cases of new bondage or old cases which did not come to light before, despite the Government's efforts. According to the latest figures submitted by the Government to the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery at its 15th Session in July 1990, the total number of identified and freed bonded labourers was 242,160 as of 31 March 1990 of whom 210,091 had been rehabilitated. In its report the Government reiterates its commitment to the eradication of the bonded labour system; it also states that, as previously indicated, State Governments are competent to implement the 1976 Act and are primarily responsible for identification and rehabilitation, that they have been unable to ascertain the real situation and that active involvement of trade unions and social organisations is crucially important.

The Committee recalls that it previously took note of a certain number of plans and schemes adopted for the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, either directed specifically towards bonded labour or integrating bonded labour as one of their components, namely the following: the 1986 20-Points Programme which provides, inter alia, for full implementation of laws abolishing bonded labour and involvement of voluntary agencies in the rehabilitation programme; the centrally sponsored scheme for rehabilitation and the Central Government's instructions to integrate this scheme with other anti-poverty programmes; the establishment in 1987 of the National Commission on Rural Labour, which has responsibility for bonded labour. In regard to the implementaion of the 1976 Act, in particular in relation to these different programmes and initiatives, the Committee notes the following points, taking into account the extracts from the report by the Subcommittee of the Parliamentary Committee attached to the Ministry of Labour, which were communicated by the Government:

(a) Identification and the role of vigilance committees. The Committee observes that the Parliamentary Subcommittee notes in its report that the process of identification, which the Government itself considers as the first basic step in addressing the problem of bonded labour, was in 1986-87 slow as compared to previous years; no targets are set to State Governments for identification (while targets for rehabilitation are set in the 20-Points Programme) - criticism is raised that the number of bonded labourers in the country is much larger than the identification made and that the process of identification is slow. The Parliamentary Subcommittee stresses the importance of surveys to be conducted for identification and emphasises the importance of vigilance committees, in particular as they are meant to secure the involvement of non-officials in the work of identification and rehabilitation; in the course of field visits it noted that vigilance committees had not been constituted and/or reconstituted in all districts and subdivisions where the problem of bonded labour is known to exist, and, where constituted, their meetings were not always held on a regular basis.

The Committee recalls that under section 14 of the 1976 Act vigilance committees are inter alia to advise on proper implementation of the Act, provide for economic and social rehabilitation of the freed labourers, co-ordinate the functions of rural banks and co-operative societies with a view to providing adequate credit to the freed labourers, etc. Under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Rules, 1976, the registers to be maintained by the vigilance committees include in particular the names and addresses of the freed bonded labourers, details of the benefits which they receive, including benefits in the form of land, inputs in agriculture, training in handicrafts and allied occupations, and loans. Taking into consideration the above-mentioned report of the Parliamentary Subcommittee and noting the indication by the Government that State Governments have been asked to ensure that vigilance committees are constituted, hold regular meetings and maintain and keep registers, the Committee requests the Government to provide full and detailed information: on the number of vigilance committees constituted and/or reconstituted in each State in comparison with the number of districts and subdivisions; on their activities, in particular on the results achieved in identification and rehabilitation where such committees exist; on the problems encountered and remedies suggested or introduced (for instance participation in these committees, methods of work); and on any proposals made for improvement so as to allow these committees to exist, function effectively and contribute to the abolition of the bonded labour system. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any steps taken, including any written instructions given or incentives made available by the Central Government to the State Governments, and to support and promote activities of the vigilance committees as well as steps taken by State Governments in this regard. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on any recent studies and surveys, whether at the union or state level, conducted to ascertain the real number of bonded labourers which remain to be identified and rehabilitated.

(b) Scheme for the involvement of voluntary agencies. As regards the scheme providing for the involvement of voluntary agencies in the identification and rehabilitation of bonded labourers, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report concerning subsidies paid to such agencies: a voluntary agency is given a lump sum of Rs.5,000 as a managerial subsidy; for each release order in excess of 20 it will receive an additional amount of Rs.100 as an incentive up to a maximum amount of Rs.5,000; the total amount of a subsidy can thus not exceed Rs.10,000. According to the Government this maximum has been fixed to avoid any misuse of the scheme; however there is no maximum limit in regard to rehabilitation. Noting also the Government's statement in its report that the scheme was launched on 30 October 1987 and that it was too early to assess its functioning, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the operation of the scheme and on the results achieved, indicating in particular to what extent this scheme has accelerated the process of identification and rehabilitation, its efficiency, improvements envisaged and any comments and suggestions made by the voluntary agencies concerned, such as the Bonded Labour Liberation Front, including reports by such agencies or from official sources.

(c) Scheme for rehabilitation. The Committee notes that under the centrally sponsored scheme for rehabilitation of bonded labour a sum of Rs.6,250 is to be spent for the rehabilitation of each bonded labourer. Out of this sum Rs.500 are meant to be given in cash to the bonded labourer soon after his release to enable him to tide over the period till his rehabilitation. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether such a sum has proved sufficient to avoid the newly freed labourer falling back into bondage on account of the lack of means of subsistence, given in particular the fact that a long period of time elapses between his release and his rehabilitation. The report by the Parliamentary Subcommittee indicates that there is often a very long gap between identification and rehabilitation: the target for 1987-88 for the rehabilitation of bonded labour in respect of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa and Rajasthan is less than the number of bonded labourers who had been identified but had not yet been rehabilitated as of 31 March 1987. The Subcommittee considers that in the context of the large backlog of identified bonded labour which still remains to be rehabilitated, it is abnormal that the annual targets for rehabilitation of bonded labour have been going down gradually. The Subcommittee stresses that every effort should be made to rehabilitate by the end of 1988-89 all bonded labourers who had been identified.

Since the timely rehabilitation of identified and freed bonded labourers is of the utmost importance, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to accelerate the process of rehabilition of the identified bonded labourers, in order, in particular, to reduce the danger that a newly freed bonded labourer may fall back into bondage through lack of means of subsistence.

(d) Integration of the scheme for rehabilitation with other anti-poverty schemes. In relation to the Central Government's instructions that the centrally sponsored scheme for rehabilitation of bonded labour be integrated with other anti-poverty programmes, the Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that the results are difficult to assess. The Committee notes however the information contained in the report of the Parliamentary Subcommittee on the functioning of some of these schemes. According to the report, the Department of Rural Development has issued instructions that houses constructed under the National Rural Employment Programme (NREP) and the Rural Landless Employment Generation Programme (RLEGP) should be made available to released bonded labourers free of cost; however the Subcommittee found in the course of its field visits that although some efforts at integration had been made, a lot remained to be done to provide houses to all released bonded labourers. As regards integration with other anti-poverty programmes such as the Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP) the Subcommittee considered that generally action plans had not been drawn up to ensure the integration of the centrally sponsored scheme with other anti-poverty programmes.

The Parliamentary Subcommittee states in its report that the centrally sponsored scheme envisages land-based and non-land-based patterns of assistance; complaints have been voiced that the land-based schemes are not useful where the land distributed is non-cultivable; similarly, in regard to non-land-based schemes, it has been alleged that sometimes cattle are of bad quality; in addition, according to the Planning Commission, 42 per cent of the beneficiaries have reported that the schemes were not of their choice but had been thrust on them.

Since the nature and the adequacy of rehabilitation is extremely important, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on any action plans adopted to promote the integration of the bonded labour scheme with other anti-poverty schemes, on measures effectively carried out and on results achieved. (e) Proposal for the institution of a National Commission on Bonded Labour. The Committee notes that during the discussions in the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery during its 15th Session, July 1990, Anti-Slavery International stated that the continued gravity and magnitude of the bonded labour system was partly the result of the central weakness in the design and functioning of the machinery for the implementation of the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976. It called for the establishment of a National Commission on Bonded Labour. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information in relation to this proposal.

3. Enforcement of sanctions. Under Article 25 of the Convention, the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence, and the Government must ensure that penalties imposed by law are really adequate and strictly enforced. Under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, compulsion to render bonded labour, advancement of bonded debt, enforcement of any custom, tradition, contract, agreement or other instrument requiring any service to be rendered under the bonded labour system are punishable with imprisonment for up to three years and a fine of up to Rs.2,000 (sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Act); the Act provides for various measures to be taken by state authorities to ensure punishment of offenders. In its previous observation the Committee noted however that few cases of imprisonment had been reported and it requested the Government, in view of the gravity of the problem, to take effective measures to secure the rigourous application of the laws prohibiting and punishing bonded labour.

The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that the Union Labour Minister has stressed to the State Governments the need to launch prosecutions against bonded labour keepers immediately after identification and release of bonded labourers and that in order to avoid any misuse of the allocation of the pecuniary grants, the Union Government has made it clear that if a fresh identification of bonded labour is not accompanied by the launching of prosecution against the bonded labour keeper, the Government may refuse to pay its share of money for rehabilitation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the results achieved by these measures which are intended to avoid corruption and misappropriation of funds but which at the same time must not adversely affect the process of identification and freeing of bonded labour.

4. The Committee has also taken note of the information provided to the United Nations Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery at its 14th Session concerning actions brought before the Supreme Court of India by social action groups which resulted for instance in the release of several thousand bonded labourers in April-May 1988 in the district of Raipur. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the actions brought before the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts of the different States concerning bonded labour, the decisions taken by the Courts and the implementation of these decisions by state authorities. It also requests the Government to provide information including statistics on the number of prosecutions made, sanctions imposed and any other relevant information permitting the Committee to assess the efficiency of the enforcement mechanisms.

Child bonded labour

5. The Committee has taken note of the discussions in the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery of the United Nations Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities at its 14th and 15th Sessions, 1989 and 1990. The Committee notes that the reports of the Working group (doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1989/39 of 28 August 1989 and E/CN.4/Sub.2/1990/44 of 23 August 1990) refer to information provided by Anti-Slavery International concerning child labour in relation to debt bondage in the South Asian countries; this information is set out in the report of the South Asian Seminar on Child Servitude held in June-July 1989 and attended by representatives of non-governmental organisations from five countries. In relation to the situation in India, the report refers to children in bondage in numerous occupations, working under inhuman and hazardous conditions. This report states that debt bondage, force or compulsion is common in almost all categories of child labour. A semi-feudal master-servant relationship supplemented by the vicious circle of indebtedness, and caste structure creates the most exploitative form of child servitude, which prevails in the agrarian as well as in other sectors. According to the estimates contained in the report several million children, between the ages of 5 and 14, are in chronic bondage in agriculture; around a million in the brick kiln, stone quarry and construction industries; hundreds of thousands in carpet-weaving, handlooms, match and fire works, glass bangles, diamond-cutting and polishing, as well as in lock-making. Child bondage and forced labour is connected with the trafficking and kidnapping of children, repression, beating, sex abuse, starvation, abnormal working hours, no freedom of movement, unhygienic and dangerous working conditions, and exposure of the children to grave health hazards.

According to the report, constitutional and legislative provisions adopted to protect the children exist, but are not applied. The Committee notes that Article 24 of the Constitution of India provides that no child below the age of 14 years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or employed in any hazardous employment; under Article 39 the State shall direct its policy towards securing that the tender age of children is not abused and that chidren are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment. Provisions enacted for the welfare of children establishing a minimum age for employment, prohibiting night work and requiring medical examinations are contained in a series of legislative texts, in particular in the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, No. 61 of 1986. The child bonded labour system was declared an offence for the first time in 1933 under the Children (Pledging of Labour) Act, and, as mentioned above, the bonded labour system was outlawed in 1976 under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act No. 19 of 1976.

The report of the seminar alleges that despite protective legislation, the situation in practice of bonded children is not improving: for instance in the Mirzapur Bhadohi belt, the carpet-weaving region in Uttar Pradesh, despite the 1983 judgement of the Supreme Court of India and the report by the Commissioner designated by the Court and the subsequent release of more than 1,000 bonded children, child welfare legislation continues to be openly violated, and organised rackets of kidnapping or luring away of children and forcing them to weave are continuing. The Committee notes that in a Government of India project document made available to the ILO (ILO, Conditions of Work Digest, Vol. 7, No. 1/1988 p. 125) it is stated that despite the 1986 Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, under which carpet weaving continues to be a prohibited activity for children, children are still employed in a clandestine manner; there are three catagories of child workers: children of the loom-owners themselves; children from neighbouring areas; and children sent from distant places, some of whom have been sold by their parents or by unscrupulous middlemen and therefore work as bonded labourers. The project provides that priority education will be given to young children and children from other States who are either working as bonded labourers or who have lost contact with their families.

The report of the seminar further alleges that despite sanctions provided for in legislation, exploiters have no fear of being punished or penalised, the enforcement machinery is weak and the indolence of the authorities, and collusion and corruption hamper identification, release and rehabilitation of the bonded children. As regards, in particular, rehabilitation, the report calls for a more global approach including measures such as a separate rehabilitation scheme for child bonded labourers, and free and compulsory education at least for bonded children.

The Committee recalls that under Article 25 of the Convention the illegal exaction of forced or compulsory labour shall be punishable as a penal offence and the Government must ensure that penalties imposed by law are really adequate and strictly enforced. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide detailed comments on the allegations referred to above, as well as full information on measures adopted or contemplated to eradicate in practice the exploitation of child labour including child bonded labour. Noting that under section 16 of the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, any person, police officer or inspector may file a complaint of the commission of an offence under the Act, the Committee would appreciate information on the complaints filed, in particular, in regard to bonded child labourers, prosecutions launched, penalties imposed including copies of court decisions. It also requests the Government to indicate to what extent it was possible to take advantage of complaints and/or prosecutions initiated under the 1986 Act to initiate also proceedings under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 so as to identify, free and rehabilitate the bonded children concerned. The Committee recalls in this connection that under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, the penalty provided for is imprisonment for up to three years and a fine up to Rs.2,000 while under the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, such penalty is imprisonment between three months and one year or a fine between Rs.10,000 to Rs.20,000.

6. The Committee notes with interest the National Policy on Child Labour and different projects and initiatives related to child labour which are referred to in the ILO "Conditions of Work Digest", Vol. 7, No. 1/1988. The Committee notes in particular with interest that the National Policy on Child Labour includes a legislative action plan, an anti-poverty oriented development programme, and an area-specific plan of action. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the action already taken to put into practice this national policy and on results achieved as well as on any further concrete steps envisaged in the near future.